发布求助
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献

Oxford University Commonwealth Law Journal最新文献

筛选
英文 中文
Disgust for the sexual: the emotional side of obscenity law in India 对性的厌恶：印度淫秽法律的情感一面
Oxford University Commonwealth Law Journal Pub Date : 2022-07-03 DOI: 10.1080/14729342.2022.2146946
Latika Vashist
{"title":"Disgust for the sexual: the emotional side of obscenity law in India","authors":"Latika Vashist","doi":"10.1080/14729342.2022.2146946","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14729342.2022.2146946","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This article traces the judicial discourse in obscenity cases in (colonial and postcolonial) India (1860–2015). I demonstrate that law emerges as an affective site that mobilises the emotions of disgust (towards sex) and fear (of transgressive sexualities) to strengthen the dominant (hetero)normative sexual order. In this landscape of emotional adjudication, the ‘sexual’ invariably comes under erasure unless it meets the ‘community standard’ of honourable love.","PeriodicalId":35148,"journal":{"name":"Oxford University Commonwealth Law Journal","volume":"22 1","pages":"150 - 176"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47757318","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
Denials, defences, and damages-limiting rules in breach of contract 违反合同的拒绝、辩护和损害赔偿限制规则
Oxford University Commonwealth Law Journal Pub Date : 2022-01-02 DOI: 10.1080/14729342.2022.2027700
Ben Cartwright
{"title":"Denials, defences, and damages-limiting rules in breach of contract","authors":"Ben Cartwright","doi":"10.1080/14729342.2022.2027700","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14729342.2022.2027700","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The role of defences in breach of contract has been historically under-addressed: most treatises do not have a section dedicated to defences, and writers often doubt the utility of defences terminology. In this article, I argue that our understanding of breach of contract actions will be improved if we recognise that there are three types of arguments that can be made to escape the liability to pay damages for breach: denials, defences, and damages-limiting rules. Denials negate one or more of the elements of the action, defences are liability-defeating reasons external to the action, and damages-limiting rules affect the defendant’s liability to pay damages once a claim has been made out against them. After justifying this taxonomy from practical and philosophical perspectives, I then categorise several contract doctrines accordingly. By classifying doctrines in this way, the taxonomy can better illuminate the individual doctrines and the role of defences in contract more generally.","PeriodicalId":35148,"journal":{"name":"Oxford University Commonwealth Law Journal","volume":"22 1","pages":"21 - 45"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42956515","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abolishing irrationality: a decision so unreasonable that no reasonable judiciary could ever come to it? 废除非理性：一个如此不合理的决定，以至于任何合理的司法机构都无法做出？
Oxford University Commonwealth Law Journal Pub Date : 2022-01-02 DOI: 10.1080/14729342.2022.2058212
Ong Ken Wei
{"title":"Abolishing irrationality: a decision so unreasonable that no reasonable judiciary could ever come to it?","authors":"Ong Ken Wei","doi":"10.1080/14729342.2022.2058212","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14729342.2022.2058212","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Much ink has been spilt over the workings of irrationality review and its continuing relevance. Absent in large part, however, is an examination of these issues situated outside the English context. This article seeks to fill that gap from a Singaporean perspective. It will be argued that, as a ground of review, the principle of rationality is amply adequate, and that its retention as part of Singaporean administrative law allows for an articulation of our own approach towards judicial review. The observations and arguments made therein may be of interest to other common law jurisdictions which find themselves at a crossroads.","PeriodicalId":35148,"journal":{"name":"Oxford University Commonwealth Law Journal","volume":"22 1","pages":"67 - 93"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45249122","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Revisiting remedies and the legality-merits distinction in Singapore administrative law: CBB v Law Society of Singapore [2021] SGCA 6 重新审视新加坡行政法中的救济和合法性-merit区分:CBB诉新加坡法律协会[2021]SGCA 6
Oxford University Commonwealth Law Journal Pub Date : 2022-01-02 DOI: 10.1080/14729342.2022.2026629
Kenny Chng, Soon Wen Qi Andrea
{"title":"Revisiting remedies and the legality-merits distinction in Singapore administrative law: CBB v Law Society of Singapore [2021] SGCA 6","authors":"Kenny Chng, Soon Wen Qi Andrea","doi":"10.1080/14729342.2022.2026629","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14729342.2022.2026629","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT It is a general principle of administrative law that the courts will not compel a decision-maker to perform a public duty in a particular manner by way of a mandatory order. However, in CBB v Law Society of Singapore [2021] SGCA 6, the Singapore Court of Appeal notably accepted that an exception could be made to this general principle where there was only one reasonable way to perform the public duty in question. Beyond the decision’s obvious ramifications for the law relating to public law remedies in Singapore, this note argues that the Court of Appeal’s reasoning has significant implications for administrative law in Singapore more broadly. Indeed, the Court’s ruling is indicative of a shift in attitude towards the legality-merits distinction, a foundational principle of administrative law in Singapore.","PeriodicalId":35148,"journal":{"name":"Oxford University Commonwealth Law Journal","volume":"22 1","pages":"108 - 115"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42602760","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Surrey County Council v NHS Lincolnshire Clinical Commissioning Group [2020] EWHC 3550 (QB) and the relationship between unjust enrichment and public bodies 萨里郡议会诉NHS林肯郡临床调试组[2020]EWHC 3550 (QB)以及不当得利与公共机构之间的关系
Oxford University Commonwealth Law Journal Pub Date : 2022-01-02 DOI: 10.1080/14729342.2022.2058213
Zamir R. Golestani
{"title":"Surrey County Council v NHS Lincolnshire Clinical Commissioning Group [2020] EWHC 3550 (QB) and the relationship between unjust enrichment and public bodies","authors":"Zamir R. Golestani","doi":"10.1080/14729342.2022.2058213","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14729342.2022.2058213","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT In both tort and contract, the addition of a public body as a party to proceedings typically superimposes complex, policy-based considerations onto a given claim. This premise remains true in the context of a claim concerning restitution for unjust enrichment. The recent case of Surrey County Council v NHS Lincolnshire [2020] EWHC 3550 (QB) concerned a successful unjust enrichment claim by one public body against another to recover costs of specialist care for an autistic man which, although statutorily required, were not provided. The facts of the case and its decision provide fertile ground to explore the complexities that arise in an unjust enrichment claim where a public body is party to the proceedings. In particular, the reasoning of Thornton J encourages analysis of the policy-based reasons for restitution and the utility of the change of position defence in the context of an unjust enrichment claim against public bodies.","PeriodicalId":35148,"journal":{"name":"Oxford University Commonwealth Law Journal","volume":"22 1","pages":"94 - 107"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49158658","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Dealing with a minor’s land in Singapore 处理未成年人在新加坡的土地
Oxford University Commonwealth Law Journal Pub Date : 2022-01-02 DOI: 10.1080/14729342.2022.2076969
A. W. See
{"title":"Dealing with a minor’s land in Singapore","authors":"A. W. See","doi":"10.1080/14729342.2022.2076969","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14729342.2022.2076969","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This article attempts to dispel the myth that a trustee holding land on trust for a minor could deal with it only with court approval. The source of this myth is a series of antiquated statutes suggesting that minors belong to a vulnerable group deserving of special protection. As the complex interpretive exercise reveals, much of the difficulty is in identifying the precise problem(s) intended to be addressed by these statutes, as this is not at all clear from their wording. Adding to the complexity is the location of the topic at the intersection between the old and the new, thus requiring attention to the divergences between Singaporean and post-1925 English laws, as well as the status of the general law within the Torrens system of title registration. As this discussion illustrates, the study of land law is often inextricably linked to the study of the history of land law.","PeriodicalId":35148,"journal":{"name":"Oxford University Commonwealth Law Journal","volume":"22 1","pages":"46 - 66"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44427817","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
More than a side-wind: rethinking the consideration requirement in Commonwealth contract law 不止一个侧风：对英联邦合同法中对价要求的再思考
Oxford University Commonwealth Law Journal Pub Date : 2021-12-05 DOI: 10.1080/14729342.2021.2008137
F. Gélinas, Zackary Goldford
{"title":"More than a side-wind: rethinking the consideration requirement in Commonwealth contract law","authors":"F. Gélinas, Zackary Goldford","doi":"10.1080/14729342.2021.2008137","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14729342.2021.2008137","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT In the common law tradition, it has long been the case that a contract not backed by consideration is no contract at all. But this rule has been slowly washed away in various contexts, especially contract modifications, in various Commonwealth jurisdictions. In response to these developments, we argue that the consideration requirement has outlived its purpose and that it is time for it to be formally retired. We identify its purpose as ensuring fairness, voluntariness, and the integrity of consent, and we demonstrate that a collection of doctrinal tools have become increasingly available in recent years to fulfil this purpose. We conclude by discussing some of the harms that the consideration requirement causes. Since it does no good and causes some harm, it is time for it to go.","PeriodicalId":35148,"journal":{"name":"Oxford University Commonwealth Law Journal","volume":"22 1","pages":"1 - 20"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-12-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49364173","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
The Covid-19 pandemic and the potential for investor-state claims: a Caribbean perspective 新冠肺炎大流行和投资者-国家索赔的潜力：加勒比视角
Oxford University Commonwealth Law Journal Pub Date : 2021-07-03 DOI: 10.1080/14729342.2021.1984722
Jason Haynes, A. Hippolyte
{"title":"The Covid-19 pandemic and the potential for investor-state claims: a Caribbean perspective","authors":"Jason Haynes, A. Hippolyte","doi":"10.1080/14729342.2021.1984722","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14729342.2021.1984722","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The Covid-19 pandemic has wreaked havoc on Caribbean countries. These countries have lost billions of dollars in foreign capital. Although the region's peoples are currently being vaccinated, the damage already caused by Covid-19 remains immeasurable and will likely continue for many years. Irrespective of whether vaccination results in herd immunity, Caribbean countries not only face the unenviable challenge of recalibrating their economies post-Covid-19, but also the prospect of being hauled before arbitral tribunals in respect of claims brought by investors alleging breaches of investor protection standards as a result of measures taken in response to the pandemic. To the extent that there is a real risk of claims of this nature arising in future, this article contends that Covid-19, as an unprecedented event, exposes the asymmetrical nature of the international investment regime, and its inability to fully countenance the domestic realities of developing countries that are confronted with existential threats.","PeriodicalId":35148,"journal":{"name":"Oxford University Commonwealth Law Journal","volume":"21 1","pages":"212 - 249"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48901530","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2
Zombie marks invade New Zealand! How scared should the rest of the world be? 僵尸印记入侵新西兰!世界其他国家该有多害怕呢?
Oxford University Commonwealth Law Journal Pub Date : 2021-07-03 DOI: 10.1080/14729342.2021.1991147
M. Handler, Robert Burrell
{"title":"Zombie marks invade New Zealand! How scared should the rest of the world be?","authors":"M. Handler, Robert Burrell","doi":"10.1080/14729342.2021.1991147","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14729342.2021.1991147","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT It would be natural to suppose that once a trade mark has been expunged from the trade marks register it would cease to have legal force or effect. For many years this was indeed the position in British Commonwealth countries. However, the New Zealand Supreme Court has recently held that a trade mark whose registration has been revoked can still block a subsequent application for registration in certain circumstances. In so doing the New Zealand Supreme Court followed an earlier decision of the Singapore Court of Appeal that was to much the same effect. This article argues that these decisions are problematic on policy grounds and rest on faulty doctrinal premises. It is important to recognise these issues now, not least because there is a danger that this approach may spread to other jurisdictions, including the EU, Hong Kong, and the UK.","PeriodicalId":35148,"journal":{"name":"Oxford University Commonwealth Law Journal","volume":"21 1","pages":"275 - 294"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43454008","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
The HMCS Unconscionability: adrift in the Atlantic HMCS的无意识：漂泊在大西洋
Oxford University Commonwealth Law Journal Pub Date : 2021-07-03 DOI: 10.1080/14729342.2021.1991648
M. Moore
{"title":"The HMCS Unconscionability: adrift in the Atlantic","authors":"M. Moore","doi":"10.1080/14729342.2021.1991648","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14729342.2021.1991648","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This paper traces the Canadian doctrine of unconscionability’s distant voyage in Uber Technologies v Heller 2020 SCC 16 from the familiar waters of the English ‘unconscionable bargains’ family of doctrines, found in various common law jurisdictions. Since the 19th century, those jurisdictions had included Canada. However, in this important decision of the Supreme Court of Canada, the position of the doctrine shifted significantly. Its movement can be identified as towards the American doctrine of unconscionability, a distinct doctrine not part of the English family, based rather on §2-302 of the Uniform Commercial Code. Court-watchers in the United Kingdom and other Commonwealth jurisdictions wondering whether this reinterpretation of unconscionability might represent a model for progressive reform should understand why it does not. Adrift between two doctrines with different purposes, it is insufficiently suited to serve either. Meanwhile, it may disrupt business reliance on standard form contracts, and cause tremendous contractual instability.","PeriodicalId":35148,"journal":{"name":"Oxford University Commonwealth Law Journal","volume":"21 1","pages":"336 - 349"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45826419","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
首页 上一页 下一页 尾页
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整，为了账户安全，请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
相关产品
×
本文献相关产品
联系我们：info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务，方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号：481959085
Book学术官方微信