Climate Change Liability: Comparing Risks for Directors in Jurisdictions of the Common and Civil Law

Climate Law ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 151-196
Author(s):  
Rolf H. Weber ◽  
Andreas Hösli
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Comparative Analysis ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Civil Law ◽  
Social Impacts ◽  
Securities Law ◽  
The Common

Businesses are increasingly expected to consider the environmental and social impacts of their undertakings. In recent years, the focus has shifted to climate-change-related aspects of corporate behaviour. While climate change litigation against corporations continues to evolve globally, there is a growing debate with regard to directors’ duties: are directors expected to consider climate-change-related risks in their decision making? If yes, to what extent? The issue has received considerable attention from commentators in relation to common law jurisdictions, but so far it has been less discussed in relation to civil law countries. This article attempts to contribute to filling this gap by presenting a comparative analysis, with a main focus on claims based on corporate and securities law.

Judicial Oversight of Procedural Fairness and Propriety in Europe: Diversity Within Commonality

2021 ◽  
pp. 339-366
Author(s):  
Giacinto della Cananea
Keyword(s):  
Comparative Analysis ◽  
Common Core ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Civil Law ◽  
Judicial Independence ◽  
Procedural Fairness ◽  
Administrative Law ◽  
Legal Systems ◽  
The Common ◽  
Initial Focus

This chapter explores the common and distinctive elements that emerge from the comparative analysis of legal systems, in terms of commonality and diversity in administrative law. It begins by outlining the main institutional features of the legal systems selected for the comparison, with an initial focus on the idea of a 'divide' between civil law and common law. The two important features of the legal systems examined in this book include judicial independence and judicial specialization. The chapter then discusses the procedural requirements at the heart of the factual analysis. It concludes by reflecting on the relevance and significance of this analysis for the general enquiry concerning the common core of European administrative laws.

Comparative Law and the Study of Mixed Legal Systems

2006 ◽  
pp. 476-512 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jacques Du Plessis
Keyword(s):  
Comparative Analysis ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Civil Law ◽  
Comparative Law ◽  
Legal Systems ◽  
Legal Development ◽  
European Context ◽  
The Common

Legal systems generally are ‘mixed’ in the sense that they have been influenced by a variety of other systems. However, this label traditionally is only attached to those systems which represent a mix between the common law and the civilian tradition. This article focuses on what studies of mixed legal systems reveal about the broader comparative themes of the classification of legal systems, whether and how borrowing can take place, the quality of the law to which borrowing gives rise, the connection between civil law and the common law in the European context, and the role which language can play in comparative analysis and legal development.

Is Style of Reasoning a Fundamental Difference Between the Common Law and the Civil Law?

2017 ◽  
Vol 17 (2) ◽  
pp. 238-290
Author(s):  
Colm Peter McGrath ◽  
◽  
Helmut Koziol ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Common Law ◽  
Civil Law ◽  
Fundamental Difference ◽  
The Common

scholarly journals Interpreting change through legal culture: the case of the Irish exclusionary rule

Legal Studies ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 1-18
Author(s):  
Claire Hamilton
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Legal Culture ◽  
Macro Level ◽  
Judicial Decision ◽  
Exclusionary Rule ◽  
Judicial Decision Making ◽  
The Common ◽  
Law Of Evidence

Abstract The changes to the Irish exclusionary rule introduced by the judgment in People (DPP) v JC mark an important watershed in the Irish law of evidence and Irish legal culture more generally. The case relaxed the exclusionary rule established in People (DPP) v Kenny, one of the strictest in the common law world, by creating an exception based on ‘inadvertence’. This paper examines the decision through the lens of legal culture, drawing in particular on Lawrence Friedman's distinction between ‘internal’ and ‘external’ legal culture to help understand the factors contributing to the decision. The paper argues that Friedman's concept and, in particular, the dialectic between internal and external legal culture, holds much utility at a micro as well as macro level, in interrogating the cultural logics at work in judicial decision-making.

Classifying precontractual liability: a comparative analysis

Legal Studies ◽  
2001 ◽  
Vol 21 (2) ◽  
pp. 153-191 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joachim Dietrich
Keyword(s):  
Common Law ◽  
Civil Law ◽  
Tort Law ◽  
Contract Law ◽  
Common Elements ◽  
Ongoing Debate ◽  
Unjust Enrichment ◽  
The Common ◽  
Initial Focus

The common law has solved questions of liability arising in the context of precontractual negotiations by resort to a range of different doctrines and approaches, adopting in effect ‘piecemeal’ solutions to questions of precontractual liability. Consequently, debate has arisen as to how best to classify or categorise claims for precontractual work and as to which doctrines are best suited to solving problems arising from anticipated contracts. The purpose of this article is to consider this question of how best to classify (cases of) precontractual liability. The initial focus will be on the ongoing debate as to whether principles of contract law or principles of unjust enrichment can better solve problems of precontractual liability. I will be suggesting that unjust enrichment theory offers little by way of explanation of cases of precontractual liability and, indeed, draws on principles of contract law in determining questions of liability for precontractual services rendered, though it does so by formulating those principles under different guises. Irrespective, however, of the doctrines utilised by the common law to impose liability, it is possible to identify a number of common elements unifying all cases of precontractual liability. In identifying such common elements of liability, it is necessary to draw on principles of both contract and tort law. How, then, should cases of precontractual liability best be classified? A consideration of the issue of classification of precontractual liability from a perspective of German civil law will demonstrate that a better understanding of cases of precontractual liability will be gained by classifying such cases as lying between the existing categories of contract and tort.

scholarly journals Transparency in corporate governance: Extent of directors duty to declare interest in company’s transactions

2015 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 137-148 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anthony O. Nwafor
Keyword(s):  
South Africa ◽  
Corporate Governance ◽  
United Kingdom ◽  
Comparative Analysis ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Men And Women ◽  
Legal Personality ◽  
The Common ◽  
The Law ◽  
Important Position

The realization that the directors occupy important position in corporate governance, and as business men and women, cannot be prevented from having dealings with the company, demand a close scrutiny of corporate transactions in which they are directly or indirectly involved or have an interest to ensure that such interest is not placed above their duty to the company. One of the ways in which the law strives to achieve this balance is by imposing a duty on the director to disclose to the board any interest he has in company’s transactions. This requirement which was previously governed by the common law and the company’s articles, is presently increasingly finding a place in companies statutes in different jurisdictions. The paper examines, through a comparative analysis, the provisions on the duty of the director to disclose interest in company’s transactions in South Africa and United Kingdom with the aim of discovering the extent to which the statute in both jurisdictions upholds the common law prescriptions. The paper argues that the need for transparency in corporate governance and the preservation of the distinct legal personality of the company demand that the duty to disclose interest should be upheld even in those cases of companies run by a sole director.

scholarly journals The publication of judicial decisions as a reason for convincing precedent

1970 ◽  
pp. 195-199
Author(s):  
Roman Sabodash
Keyword(s):  
Common Law ◽  
Civil Law ◽  
General Idea ◽  
Court Decisions ◽  
Supreme Courts ◽  
State Register ◽  
Pros And Cons ◽  
Legal Position ◽  
The Common ◽  
The Right

The paper shows how the publication of court decisions influenced the formation of a precedent. The author reviewed scientific works devoted to research the precedent in common and continental law. The research explains that the formation of precedent in England was accompanied by development of the judgment’s reviews and their prevalence among lawyers. Of course, publication of court decisions was not a major factor in setting a precedent, but it played a significant role in this. The paper also describes facts of the publication of court decisions in Italy, Germany, France and the Netherlands, as well as the admissibility of their citations at the court of cassation. The general idea of the paper is that convincing precedent exists and is used although the countries of continental law do not have a «classic» precedent. The paper gives a review of the importance of the state register of court decisions for setting a convincing precedent in Ukraine. The author analyzes the pros and cons of citing court decisions. It’s stated that, unfortunately, the quotations of court decisions is not always correct and sometimes amounts to rewriting the «right» legal position without comparing the circumstances of the case. The article concludes that the practice of applying a convincing precedent in Ukraine is only emerging and needs further improvement.          It has been found out that the publication of judgments of supreme courts is one of the factors that helped to establish precedent in common law countries. The publication of court rulings also created the conditions for a convincing precedent in civil law countries (especially in private law). At the same time, the formation of a “convincing precedent» in countries where court decisions are published in publicly available electronic court registers is much faster than in common law countries. Of course, the structure and the significance of the precedent in the common law and civil law countries are different, but one cannot dismiss that publication of court decisions as one of the factors for establishing the precedent.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document