诉讼中的保险与投资:诉讼保险与索赔投资的比较法律史

IF 0.6 Q2 LAW
Willem H. Van Boom
{"title":"诉讼中的保险与投资:诉讼保险与索赔投资的比较法律史","authors":"Willem H. Van Boom","doi":"10.1080/2049677X.2020.1768255","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Today, liability insurance and legal expenses insurance are generally accepted as benefits to the society and the idea of insuring against litigation risks does not repel us. In the past, however, it was held that such litigation insurance was fuelling litigation at best or going against good morals at worst. What are the reasons behind this? And how does this compare to the legal history of investment in litigation gains? Claim investment has been frowned upon for centuries and today a dismissive narrative continues to dog this ‘product’. So, the legal discourses surrounding insurance and claim investments have developed in different directions. How can this be possibly explained? This paper attempts to answer these questions by comparing the historical developments within European jurisdictions of the concept of insurance against litigation loss and that of the concept of litigation investment. Thus, it aims to improve our understanding of historical paths of both phenomena.","PeriodicalId":53815,"journal":{"name":"Comparative Legal History","volume":"8 1","pages":"2 - 26"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2020-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/2049677X.2020.1768255","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Insuring vs. investing in litigation: a comparative legal history of litigation insurance and claim investment\",\"authors\":\"Willem H. Van Boom\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/2049677X.2020.1768255\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Today, liability insurance and legal expenses insurance are generally accepted as benefits to the society and the idea of insuring against litigation risks does not repel us. In the past, however, it was held that such litigation insurance was fuelling litigation at best or going against good morals at worst. What are the reasons behind this? And how does this compare to the legal history of investment in litigation gains? Claim investment has been frowned upon for centuries and today a dismissive narrative continues to dog this ‘product’. So, the legal discourses surrounding insurance and claim investments have developed in different directions. How can this be possibly explained? This paper attempts to answer these questions by comparing the historical developments within European jurisdictions of the concept of insurance against litigation loss and that of the concept of litigation investment. Thus, it aims to improve our understanding of historical paths of both phenomena.\",\"PeriodicalId\":53815,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Comparative Legal History\",\"volume\":\"8 1\",\"pages\":\"2 - 26\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-01-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/2049677X.2020.1768255\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Comparative Legal History\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/2049677X.2020.1768255\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Comparative Legal History","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/2049677X.2020.1768255","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

今天,责任保险和法律费用保险被普遍认为是对社会的好处,为诉讼风险投保的想法并不排斥我们。然而,过去人们认为,这种诉讼保险往好里说是助长诉讼,往坏里说是违背道德。这背后的原因是什么?这与投资诉讼收益的法律历史相比如何?几个世纪以来,索赔投资一直不受欢迎,如今,一种轻蔑的说法继续困扰着这种“产品”。因此,围绕保险和索赔投资的法律话语已经朝着不同的方向发展。这怎么可能解释呢?本文试图通过比较欧洲司法管辖区内诉讼损失保险概念和诉讼投资概念的历史发展来回答这些问题。因此,它旨在提高我们对这两种现象的历史路径的理解。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Insuring vs. investing in litigation: a comparative legal history of litigation insurance and claim investment
Today, liability insurance and legal expenses insurance are generally accepted as benefits to the society and the idea of insuring against litigation risks does not repel us. In the past, however, it was held that such litigation insurance was fuelling litigation at best or going against good morals at worst. What are the reasons behind this? And how does this compare to the legal history of investment in litigation gains? Claim investment has been frowned upon for centuries and today a dismissive narrative continues to dog this ‘product’. So, the legal discourses surrounding insurance and claim investments have developed in different directions. How can this be possibly explained? This paper attempts to answer these questions by comparing the historical developments within European jurisdictions of the concept of insurance against litigation loss and that of the concept of litigation investment. Thus, it aims to improve our understanding of historical paths of both phenomena.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
20
期刊介绍: Comparative Legal History is an international and comparative review of law and history. Articles will explore both ''internal'' legal history (doctrinal and disciplinary developments in the law) and ''external'' legal history (legal ideas and institutions in wider contexts). Rooted in the complexity of the various Western legal traditions worldwide, the journal will also investigate other laws and customs from around the globe. Comparisons may be either temporal or geographical and both legal and other law-like normative traditions will be considered. Scholarship on comparative and trans-national historiography, including trans-disciplinary approaches, is particularly welcome.
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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