Cases, Materials and Texts on Unjustified Enrichment. (Ius Commune Casebooks for the Common Law of Europe). Edited by Jack Beatson & Eltjo Schrage. Oxford; Portland OR: Hart Publishing, 2003. Pp. xlvii, 585. ISBN 1-84113-126-1. US$60.00.

2004 ◽  
Vol 32 (3) ◽  
pp. 639-642 ◽  
Author(s):  
Katherine Topulos ◽  
Ralph Gaebler
Keyword(s):  
Common Law ◽  
Ius Commune ◽  
The Common ◽  
Unjustified Enrichment

Unjustified Enrichment in Comparative Perspective

2006 ◽  
pp. 968-1002
Author(s):  
Daniel Visser
Keyword(s):  
Common Law ◽  
Civil Law ◽  
Comparative Perspective ◽  
The Future ◽  
The Common ◽  
English Law ◽  
The Law ◽  
Level Of Understanding ◽  
Unjustified Enrichment

Unjustified enrichment confronted both civil and common lawyers with thinking which was often completely outside the paradigm to which they had become accustomed. The recognition of unjustified enrichment as a cause of action in its own right in English law created a new arena of uncertainty between the systems. This article argues that comparative lawyers can make an important contribution to the future of the fractured and fractious world of unjustified enrichment. It may help to uncover the enormous wealth of learning of which both the common law and the civil law are the repositories, and so bring the same level of understanding to the law of unjustified enrichment which has, over the years, been achieved between the systems in regard to contract and tort.

Common Law Marriage

1990 ◽  
Vol 49 (1) ◽  
pp. 117-134 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter Lucas
Keyword(s):  
Canon Law ◽  
Recent Article ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Ius Commune ◽  
Historical Processes ◽  
The Reformation ◽  
The Common ◽  
Common Law Marriage

The expression “common law marriage” has layers of paradox. It now denotes, as Mr. J. C. Hall pointed out in a recent article in this Journal, a relationship whose characteristic is precisely that it is extra-marital. Previously, for many centuries, the validity of such a marriage was a matter not for the common but the canon law and so, before the Reformation, for the canon law of Rome, the ius commune, Maitland's “wonderful system” administered by the courts Christian and directly applicable throughout western Christendom. The story of the common law marriage in England, Scotland and Ireland offers glimpses of great historical processes and-provides a wider context in which to consider the question raised by Mr Hall as to the survival, or revival, of the common law marriage in England.

Unjustified Enrichment in Comparative Perspective

2019 ◽  
pp. 960-993
Author(s):  
Daniel Visser
Keyword(s):  
Common Law ◽  
Civil Law ◽  
The Other ◽  
Comparative Perspective ◽  
Unjust Enrichment ◽  
The Future ◽  
The Common ◽  
The One ◽  
Level Of Understanding ◽  
Unjustified Enrichment

The emergence of unjust enrichment as a cause of action in its own right in England and Australia sparked a remarkable debate between, on the one hand, civil and common lawyers, who were confronted with thinking which was often completely outside the paradigm to which they had become accustomed, and, on the other hand, between common lawyers inter se about the merits of the various ways in which unjust enrichment may be understood and organized. At the heart of this debate was the struggle of the common law to confront and deal with the deficit caused by its reliance solely on ‘unjust factors’ to make sense of enrichment liability without taking account of the notion of ‘absence of basis’. This chapter argues that comparative lawyers can make an important contribution to the future of the fractured and fractious world of unjustified enrichment by uncovering the enormous wealth of learning of which both the common law and the civil law are the repositories, and so bring the same level of understanding to the law of unjustified enrichment which has, over the years, been achieved between the systems in regard to contract and tort.

The Common Law (And Not Roman) Origins of Amicus Curiae in International Law – Debunking a Fake News Item

Global Jurist ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Luigi Crema
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Primary Source ◽  
Roman Law ◽  
Primary Sources ◽  
News Item ◽  
Amicus Curiae ◽  
Ius Commune ◽  
Legal Literature ◽  
The Common

Abstract The possibility for private entities interested in international trials but without the legal requirements to participate as a party was precluded, in a classical vision of international law made for states and addressed to states. At present, however, with some notable exceptions, several international jurisdictions allow for the submission of amicus curiae briefs. These briefs were introduced to international courts by common law lawyers. Legal literature generally identifies it as an institution of classical Roman law. This paper will show that this assumption is, however, doubtful. An examination of the sources cited by an important dictionary and other decades-old legal scholarship relied upon today as establishing the Roman origins of amicus curiae, and a fresh study of Roman and later continental European primary sources reveal a different picture: in reality, there is neither a basis for grounding the amicus curiae in Roman law, nor is there a basis for grounding it in the medieval continental ius commune. The primary source is most likely English common law and, not surprisingly, it was common law lawyers who introduced the briefs into international litigation.

Statuta Sunt Stricte Interpretanda? Statutes and the Common Law: A Continental Prespective

1997 ◽  
Vol 56 (2) ◽  
pp. 315-328 ◽  
Author(s):  
Reinhard Zimmermann
Keyword(s):  
Common Law ◽  
Case Law ◽  
16Th Century ◽  
The Moon ◽  
14Th Century ◽  
Ius Commune ◽  
The Common

“All statutes contrary to the common law … are to be interpreted strictly and have to be accepted in the most exact manner as they stand, and speak”. “Statutes which repeal the [common] law, have to be interpreted most strictly, and cannot be extended to cases which are not expressed in them.” “Statutes … generally consist more in ‘thus I want and thus I command’ than in a regulation according to reason”; “they fade like the moon's shadows, and like the moon they wax and wane at the legislators' whim”. It may be thought that these four sentences refer to the approach traditionally adopted in England to the interpretation of statutes. But they do not. They encapsulate the attitude adopted by the learned lawyers of the older ius commune, particularly in 13th and 14th century Italy, and in 16th century Germany. An English colleague has suggested that “civilian lawyers regard our case law with admiration and our statute book with despair”.

scholarly journals Liability for the Payment of Public School Fees

2017 ◽  
Vol 14 (6) ◽  
pp. 33
Author(s):  
Marita Carnelley
Keyword(s):  
Public School ◽  
Primary School ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Legal Issues ◽  
The Common ◽  
Unjustified Enrichment

The author highlights some legal issues regarding the liability of parents and other individuals to pay public school fees in the light of recent judicial precedent, specifically Fish Hoek Primary School v GW 2009 JOL 24624 (SCA). The various possible legal bases for the liability for such fees are examined. In this regard the common law duty to maintain as amended by legislation; contractual liability; and the concepts of household necessaries, stipulatio alteri, negotiorum gestio and unjustified enrichment are considered.

“Farewell to Unjustified Enrichment?” – A Common Law Response

2016 ◽  
Vol 20 (3) ◽  
pp. 326-337
Author(s):  
Steve Hedley
Keyword(s):  
Common Law ◽  
German Law ◽  
Unjust Enrichment ◽  
Level Of Abstraction ◽  
The Law ◽  
Unjustified Enrichment ◽  
High Level ◽  
Logical Process

In this article, Professor Steve Hedley offers a Common Law response to he recently published arguments of Professor Nils Jansen on the German law of unjustified enrichment (as to which, see Jansen, “Farewell to Unjustified Enrichment” (2016) 20 EdinLR 123). The author takes the view that Jansen's paper provided a welcome opportunity to reconsider not merely what unjust enrichment can logically be, but what it is for. He argues that unjust enrichment talk contributes little of value, and that the supposedly logical process of stating it at a high level of abstraction, and then seeking to deduce the law from that abstraction, merely distracts lawyers from the equities of the cases they consider.

Scots Law: Mixed from the Very Beginning? A Tale of Two Receptions

2000 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 3-18 ◽  
Author(s):  
WDH Sellar
Keyword(s):  
Middle Ages ◽  
Common Law ◽  
General Meeting ◽  
Roman Law ◽  
Mixed System ◽  
Annual General Meeting ◽  
Ius Commune ◽  
Profound Influence ◽  
Anglo Norman ◽  
Considerable Period

This article is the revised text of the lecture delivered to the Stair Society at its Annual General Meeting in November 1997. It defends the proposition that Scots law, from the time of its emergence in the Middle Ages, has been a “mixed” system, open to the influence of both the English Common Law and the Civilian tradition. It also compares and contrasts the Reception of the Anglo-Norman law with that of Roman law. The former was quite specific as regards both time and substantive legal content. The Reception of Roman law, on the other hand, took place over a considerable period of time, and its effects were complex and diffuse. Above all, the Civilian tradition and the wider ius commune provided an intellectual framework against which to measure Scots law. Both Receptions exercised a profound influence on the continuing development of Scots law.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document