发布求助
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献

Wiley-Blackwell: Modern Law Review最新文献

筛选
英文 中文
When Should a Retrial Be Permitted after a Conviction is Quashed on Appeal? 上诉撤销定罪后，何时容许重审?
Wiley-Blackwell: Modern Law Review Pub Date : 2011-09-01 DOI: 10.1111/j.1468-2230.2011.00868.x
J. Chalmers, F. Leverick
{"title":"When Should a Retrial Be Permitted after a Conviction is Quashed on Appeal?","authors":"J. Chalmers, F. Leverick","doi":"10.1111/j.1468-2230.2011.00868.x","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2230.2011.00868.x","url":null,"abstract":"The power to permit a retrial after a conviction has been quashed on appeal is an established part of criminal procedure, with over a third of successful appeals against conviction in England and Wales now resulting in a retrial being ordered. Despite this, relatively little attention has been paid to the circumstances in which it is appropriate for such permission to be granted. This article reviews the practice of the courts, offering a rational reconstruction of the reported cases. It argues that appeal courts have improperly entered into consideration of matters which should properly be reserved to prosecutorial discretion. While retrial after a quashed conviction should only be possible with the permission of the appeal court, such permission should – where sought – always be granted unless insufficient competent evidence was led at the first trial or a second prosecution would be an abuse of process.","PeriodicalId":426546,"journal":{"name":"Wiley-Blackwell: Modern Law Review","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2011-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"131035190","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: 3
Sienkiewicz V Greif (UK) Ltd and Willmore V Knowsley Metropolitan Borough Council: A Material Contribution to Uncertainty? Sienkiewicz V Greif (UK) Ltd和Willmore V Knowsley Metropolitan Borough Council:对不确定性的物质贡献?
Wiley-Blackwell: Modern Law Review Pub Date : 2011-09-01 DOI: 10.1111/j.1468-2230.2011.00871.x
P. Laleng
{"title":"Sienkiewicz V Greif (UK) Ltd and Willmore V Knowsley Metropolitan Borough Council: A Material Contribution to Uncertainty?","authors":"P. Laleng","doi":"10.1111/j.1468-2230.2011.00871.x","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2230.2011.00871.x","url":null,"abstract":"In the conjoined cases of Sienkiewicz and Willmore, the Supreme Court decided that the exceptional Fairchild approach to the proof of causation in negligence applied where a mesothelioma victim had been negligently exposed to asbestos by one defendant at a level well below unavoidable environmental asbestos exposure. The negligent exposures in both cases materially increased the risk of mesothelioma thereby satisfying the Fairchild test. Whilst reasserting the primacy of the common law as governing the rules of causation in mesothelioma cases, the Supreme Court failed to clarify the scope of the Fairchild exception. Moreover, in an extensive obiter discussion of epidemiological evidence, the Supreme Court has raised more questions than it has answered relating to the role, if any, of scientific evidence in the law of toxic torts.","PeriodicalId":426546,"journal":{"name":"Wiley-Blackwell: Modern Law Review","volume":"25 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2011-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"115141884","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: 6
Safety, Regulation and Tort: Fault in Context 安全、法规与侵权:语境中的过错
Wiley-Blackwell: Modern Law Review Pub Date : 2011-07-01 DOI: 10.1111/j.1468-2230.2011.00860.x
Maria Lee
{"title":"Safety, Regulation and Tort: Fault in Context","authors":"Maria Lee","doi":"10.1111/j.1468-2230.2011.00860.x","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2230.2011.00860.x","url":null,"abstract":"The relationship between tort and regulation is dense and complicated. This paper examines diverse approaches to one small element of this relationship: the relationship between regulatory norms and the standard of care in personal injury cases. The lack of clear rules governing that interaction is not surprising: we would never expect the courts to give up the authority (or abdicate the responsibility) to generate private law norms; on the other hand, nor would we expect them to ignore the potential authority and legitimacy of external norms. The strength of external standards is best identified by close scrutiny of the regulation itself. The varying authority of external norms in a private law forum requires engagement with the process by which the external norms were reached. Who and what determined the ‘ought’ of regulation will provide greater insight into the ways in which it should inform the ‘ought’ of tort.","PeriodicalId":426546,"journal":{"name":"Wiley-Blackwell: Modern Law Review","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2011-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"130544986","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: 8
Marriage and Divorce in the Supreme Court and the Law Commission: For Love or Money? 最高法院和法律委员会的婚姻和离婚:为了爱还是为了钱?
Wiley-Blackwell: Modern Law Review Pub Date : 2011-05-01 DOI: 10.1111/j.1468-2230.2011.00854.x
J. Miles
{"title":"Marriage and Divorce in the Supreme Court and the Law Commission: For Love or Money?","authors":"J. Miles","doi":"10.1111/j.1468-2230.2011.00854.x","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2230.2011.00854.x","url":null,"abstract":"The case note considers the impact of the Supreme Court decision in Radmacher v Granatino regarding pre-nuptial and other classes of nuptial agreement, together with recent proposals of the Law Commission for reform of the law relating to marital property agreements generally. It explores in particular the question of what, if any, core obligations of marriage cannot or should not be excludable by agreement.","PeriodicalId":426546,"journal":{"name":"Wiley-Blackwell: Modern Law Review","volume":"231 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2011-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"134088934","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: 3
Extending the Confusion About Bayes 扩展关于贝叶斯的困惑
Wiley-Blackwell: Modern Law Review Pub Date : 2011-05-01 DOI: 10.1111/j.1468-2230.2011.00857.x
Bernard Robertson, G. Vignaux, C. Berger
{"title":"Extending the Confusion About Bayes","authors":"Bernard Robertson, G. Vignaux, C. Berger","doi":"10.1111/j.1468-2230.2011.00857.x","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2230.2011.00857.x","url":null,"abstract":"In R v T [2010] EWCA Crim 2439, [2011] 1 Cr App Rep 85, the Court of Appeal indicated that ‘mathematical formulae’, such as likelihood ratios, should not be used by forensic scientists to analyse data where firm statistical evidence did not exist. Unfortunately, when considering the forensic scientist's evidence, the judgment consistently commits a basic logical error, the ‘transposition of the conditional’ which indicates that the Bayesian argument has not been understood and extends the confusion surrounding it. The judgment also fails to distinguish between the validity of the relationships in a formula and the precision of the data. We explain why the Bayesian method is the correct logical method for analysing forensic scientific evidence, how it works and why ‘mathematical formulae’ can be useful even where firm statistical data is lacking.","PeriodicalId":426546,"journal":{"name":"Wiley-Blackwell: Modern Law Review","volume":"18 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2011-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"131796896","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: 48
Litigation Costs and Before-the-Event Insurance: The Key to Access to Justice? 诉讼费用和事前保险:诉诸司法的关键?
Wiley-Blackwell: Modern Law Review Pub Date : 2011-03-09 DOI: 10.1111/j.1468-2230.2011.00846.x
Richard J. Lewis
{"title":"Litigation Costs and Before-the-Event Insurance: The Key to Access to Justice?","authors":"Richard J. Lewis","doi":"10.1111/j.1468-2230.2011.00846.x","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2230.2011.00846.x","url":null,"abstract":"The cost of civil litigation is a key factor in determining the extent of access to justice. Following cuts in legal aid attention has focused upon finding alternative methods of assisting litigants without producing costs which are out of proportion to the damages obtained. The recent report by Lord Justice Jackson attempts to deal with concerns about increasing and disproportionate costs said to arise in part because of the encouragement of conditional fee agreements. This article considers the proposals made in the report, and argues that too little attention has been paid to before-the-event insurance as a means of securing access to justice for the great majority of claimants who suffer personal injury.","PeriodicalId":426546,"journal":{"name":"Wiley-Blackwell: Modern Law Review","volume":"23 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2011-03-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"121218669","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: 4
The White & Carter Principle: A Restatement 怀特和卡特原则:重申
Wiley-Blackwell: Modern Law Review Pub Date : 2011-03-04 DOI: 10.1111/j.1468-2230.2011.00842.x
Qiao Liu
{"title":"The White & Carter Principle: A Restatement","authors":"Qiao Liu","doi":"10.1111/j.1468-2230.2011.00842.x","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2230.2011.00842.x","url":null,"abstract":"This article reviews the English courts' approach to the controversial decision in White & Carter (Councils) Ltd v McGregor and suggests a systematic reformulation of the principle to be derived from that case. It argues that the notion of ‘legitimate interest’, at the core of that principle, suffers from severe obscurity as it stands. The critical issue in White & Carter is whether the wastefulness of a party's continuing performance outweighs its performance interest in earning the contract price. Three tests currently employed to determine the existence of a ‘legitimate interest’, namely, the adequacy of damages, the duty to mitigate and the concept of wholly unreasonable, are assessed and dismissed as either misdirecting or unsatisfactory in other ways. Finally, it articulates a new test based on a reappraisal of existing case law and summarises the key reasons for the courts to exercise their equitable jurisdiction against wasteful performance.","PeriodicalId":426546,"journal":{"name":"Wiley-Blackwell: Modern Law Review","volume":"48 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2011-03-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"133720611","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: 3
Truancy and the Prosecution of Parents: An Unfair Burden on Mothers? 逃学与父母的起诉:母亲的不公平负担?
Wiley-Blackwell: Modern Law Review Pub Date : 2011-03-01 DOI: 10.1111/j.1468-2230.2011.00844.x
J. Donoghue
{"title":"Truancy and the Prosecution of Parents: An Unfair Burden on Mothers?","authors":"J. Donoghue","doi":"10.1111/j.1468-2230.2011.00844.x","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2230.2011.00844.x","url":null,"abstract":"This article considers the development and use of the law regulating the prosecution of parents under section 444 of the Education Act 1996, in the broader context of legislation and policy initiatives concerned with the governance of parental responsibility. It explores the ways in which the power to prosecute parents has been used by local educational authorities (LEAs) and interpreted by the courts. The article critically analyses the manner in which the powers emphasise punishment and retribution in the context of the social moralisation of ‘flawed’ parents; pay insufficient regard to the effects of parental responsibility laws on low-income, single parent families; represent an attempt to impose a simple solution on to a complex socio-economic problem; and amplify the scope for mothers to be made the subject of criminal justice interventions. It is argued that the prosecution of parents imposes an unfair burden on mothers and, in particular, single parent mothers.","PeriodicalId":426546,"journal":{"name":"Wiley-Blackwell: Modern Law Review","volume":"54 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2011-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"131282183","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: 17
Divorce (Insanity and Desertion) Act, 1958 1958年离婚(精神错乱和遗弃)法
Wiley-Blackwell: Modern Law Review Pub Date : 2011-01-18 DOI: 10.1111/j.1468-2230.1959.tb00513.x
O. Stone
{"title":"Divorce (Insanity and Desertion) Act, 1958","authors":"O. Stone","doi":"10.1111/j.1468-2230.1959.tb00513.x","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2230.1959.tb00513.x","url":null,"abstract":"THE Divorce (Insanity and Desertion) Act, 1958,1 which brings into effect some recommendations of the Royal Commission on Marriage and Divorce,2 tidies up some anomalies in the field of matrimonial causes: (i) by widening the definition of incurable unsoundness of mind (or insanity in Scotland) as a ground for divorce3 and (ii) by alleviating hardships resulting from the introduction of desertion as a ground for divorce3 after 1937.","PeriodicalId":426546,"journal":{"name":"Wiley-Blackwell: Modern Law Review","volume":"3 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2011-01-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"116282006","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
Insurance and Damages for Loss of the Breadwinner-A Problem of Statutory Interpretation 赡养人损失的保险与赔偿——一个法律解释问题
Wiley-Blackwell: Modern Law Review Pub Date : 2011-01-18 DOI: 10.1111/J.1468-2230.1959.TB00523.X
J. Unger
{"title":"Insurance and Damages for Loss of the Breadwinner-A Problem of Statutory Interpretation","authors":"J. Unger","doi":"10.1111/J.1468-2230.1959.TB00523.X","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/J.1468-2230.1959.TB00523.X","url":null,"abstract":"How should the courts apply a statute to new circumstances which were not contemplated by the legislator? Whatever is done will amount to judicial law-making, but the decision may well depend on whether this is frankly admitted or whether it is pretended that it was the legislator who provided the solution which has to be spelt out of the words of the statute which in the process will acquire a fresh and possibly unsuspected significance.","PeriodicalId":426546,"journal":{"name":"Wiley-Blackwell: Modern Law Review","volume":"19 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2011-01-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"128965275","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
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