scholarly journals Assessing Personal Injury Liabilities in China from National to Provincial Level: An International Comparative Analysis

2016 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Felix W.H. Chan ◽  
Wai-Sum Chan ◽  
Johnny S.H. Li
Keyword(s):  
Comparative Analysis ◽  
Research Methodology ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Civil Law ◽  
Mainland China ◽  
Personal Injury ◽  
Substantive Content ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
International Comparative ◽  
Two Bodies

AbstractIn a tort-based legal system, when a party is injured as a consequence of another party’s negligence, the party should be provided with sufficient compensation so that he or she may live as fulfilling a life as possible after the injury. The moral objective underlying this supposition is intuitively appealing. It is not surprising, therefore, that this jurisprudential notion is favourably regarded and widely applied in various common law and civilian jurisdictions, despite differences in tradition and culture. Nonetheless, although the two bodies of law share a similar objective in this respect, there are a number of differences in the substantive content of the law and the configuration of the rules. The present authors argue, and provide empirical evidence to support, that there are signs of convergence as both legal systems are in fact applying the same multiplicand-multiplier approach in assessing the quantum of damages. Case studies in mainland China (concerning civil law) and in the United Kingdom and Hong Kong (regarding common law) are adopted as the research methodology to explore the broader implications of this convergence.

The right of publicity in Chinese Law? A comment on the Michael Jeffrey Jordan case and comparative analysis with the US, UK, Germany, and the Asia Pacific

2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (4) ◽  
pp. 441-460
Author(s):  
Chenguo Zhang ◽  
◽  
Keyword(s):  
Comparative Analysis ◽  
Civil Law ◽  
Mainland China ◽  
Asia Pacific ◽  
Foreign Companies ◽  
Right Of Publicity ◽  
Unfair Competition Law ◽  
The Us ◽  
Trademark Registration ◽  
The Right

In Michael Jeffery Jordan v Chinese Trademark Review and Adjudication Board, the Supreme People's Court (SPC) set a precedent for foreign companies and celebrities enforcing their rights of publicity against malicious trademark registration in China. This article introduces the legal grounds of the SPC's deliberations on Jordan's claims and responds to the critiques of most Chinese commentators in the field of civil law. Deeply influenced by German law, mainland China's legal system strictly distinguishes between personality rights and property rights. Comparative analysis with the US, Germany, Japan, and Hong Kong indicates that different legal civilizations have developed different approaches to position the right of publicity logically in their legal systems. The Jordan decision indicates that the ‘right of the name’ is a prior right provided in Article 32 of the Trademark Law of the PRC. This article contends that the ‘right of the name’ as provided in the Chinese Anti-Unfair Competition Law differs from the ‘right of the name’ articulated in Article 110 of the General Principles of Civil Law (2017). The former concerns the commercial interest and property aspects of a celebrity's name, which is fairly similar to the right of publicity, while the latter regards the personality right. The further development of the right of publicity protection relies in mainland China on a consistent judicial practice.

Introduction The Birth and Growth of Judicial Review in the Civil Law World

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-8
Author(s):  
Steven Gow Calabresi
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
South Africa ◽  
United Kingdom ◽  
Judicial Review ◽  
Separation Of Powers ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Civil Law ◽  
The United States ◽  
The Political ◽  
The United Kingdom

This book is about the stunning birth and growth of judicial review in the civil law world, since 1945. In Volume I of this two-volume series, I showed that judicial review was born and grew in common law G-20 constitutional democracies and in Israel primarily: (1) when there is a need for a federalism or a separation of powers umpire, (2) when there is a rights from wrongs dynamic, (3) when there is borrowing, and (4) when the political structure of a country’s institutions leaves space within which the judiciary can operate. The countries discussed in Volume I were the following: (1) the United States, (2) Canada, (3) Australia, (4) India, (5) Israel, (6) South Africa, and (7) the United Kingdom....

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.

scholarly journals Reconceiving Judicial Office Through a Labour Law Lens

2019 ◽  
Vol 47 (2) ◽  
pp. 203-230
Author(s):  
Alysia Blackham
Keyword(s):  
Comparative Analysis ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Labour Law ◽  
The Public ◽  
The Third ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
Individual Capacity ◽  
Democratic Systems ◽  
The Individual ◽  
Judicial Role

Judges fulfil a fundamental constitutional role in democratic systems. Most research on judges, though, focuses on the public and constitutional significance of the judicial role, not the needs of individual judges. This article applies a labour law lens to help reconceive the judicial role in a way that balances the individual and collective needs of judges with the institutional and constitutional needs of the third arm of government, drawing on comparative analysis of Australia and the United Kingdom, and examples from common law countries. I argue that, while some progress has been made towards using labour law to structure and inform judicial roles, labour law offers new insights into how judges and judicial work might be supported. This may both assist judges in their individual capacity and support the judiciary as an institution. It therefore has significance for judges as individuals and the judiciary’s fundamental constitutional role.

In Our Image: Colonial Discourse and the Anglicization of the Law of Mandatory Palestine

1995 ◽  
Vol 29 (3) ◽  
pp. 291-359 ◽  
Author(s):  
Assaf Likhovski
Keyword(s):  
Common Law ◽  
Civil Law ◽  
Tort Law ◽  
Personal Injury ◽  
Colonial Discourse ◽  
Tel Aviv ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Lower Courts ◽  
The Law ◽  
Shoulder Blade

My story is full of holes. The first hole, or rather, ditch, was dug in 1930 by the municipality of Haifa. An Arab, Dr. Caesar Khoury, fell into the ditch and fractured his shoulder-blade.Could Dr. Khoury recover? The law of torts of mandatory Palestine was found in the Mejelle — an Ottoman code of Moslem civil law. Did the Mejelle provide a remedy in the case of personal injury? “Unfortunately,” said Judge Francis Baker, who delivered the opinion of the Supreme Court of Palestine, “the Mejelle dealt with liability for damages caused by animals to property, but it was ‘silent’ with regards to injuries caused to persons”. Therefore, Dr. Khoury could not recover.The second hole in my story belongs to a Jew, Feivel Danovitz. In 1939, Danovitz was run down by a truck in Tel Aviv. He sued the driver and the owner of the truck. The lower courts of Tel Aviv decided that if the Mejelle did not deal with liability for personal injury, that meant that there was a hole in the tort law of Palestine. Such a hole could be filled by recourse to the English common law in accordance with the provisions of Article 46 of the Palestine Order-in-Council, 1922. Since the English common law recognized liability for personal injury, Danovitz could recover.

scholarly journals Legal Hybridity in Hong Kong and Macau

2012 ◽  
Vol 57 (4) ◽  
pp. 665-720 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ignazio Castellucci
Keyword(s):  
Hong Kong ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Critical Role ◽  
Civil Law ◽  
Mainland China ◽  
Legal Systems ◽  
Critical Revision

The article aims to compare the case of the two Chinese Special Administrative Regions (SARs) of Hong Kong and Macau against the theoretical grid developed by Vernon V. Palmer to describe the “classical” civil law-common law mixed jurisdictions. The results of the research include an acknowledgement of the progressive hybridization of the legal systems of Hong Kong and Macau, hailing from the English common law and the Portuguese civil law tradition, respectively, by infiltration of legal models and ideologies from Mainland China. The research also leads to a critical revision and refinement of the methodology and tools developed by Palmer in order to make them applicable to a wider range of processes of legal hybridization beyond “classical” mixes, and to a better appreciation of how transitional political and institutional phases play a critical role inlegal “mixity” or hybridity.

scholarly journals Perspectives and obstacles of the shareholder activism implementation: A comparative analysis of civil and common law systems

2015 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
pp. 520-533 ◽  
Author(s):  
Khurram Parvez Raja ◽  
Alex Kostyuk
Keyword(s):  
Corporate Governance ◽  
Comparative Analysis ◽  
Stock Market ◽  
Legal System ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Civil Law ◽  
Shareholder Activism ◽  
Legal Systems ◽  
The Usa ◽  
The Uk

The paper outlines shareholder activism development in common law and civil law countries and identifies features of these legal systems that create preconditions and obstacles for shareholder activism. Our findings show that tendencies of shareholder activism depend on the type of the legal system, but also vary within the countries that share the same legal system. Thus, we conclude that the type of legal system is not the chief determinant of shareholder activism. A comparative analysis of shareholder activism in Germany and Ukraine (civil law countries) and the USA and the UK (common law countries) shows that the system of domestic corporate regulation, development of the stock market, companies’ capitalization and corporate governance influence the development of shareholder activism in equal measure.

scholarly journals Dimensions of precedent: a methodology to understand the doctrine of precedent

Perspectivas ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 75-107
Author(s):  
Florencia S. Ratti Mendaña ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Comparative Analysis ◽  
Conceptual Framework ◽  
Legal System ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Civil Law ◽  
Legal Systems ◽  
Adequate Understanding

This article evidences multiple ways in which judicial precedent is used in different legal systems. It shows that: a) precedent is currently used, one way or another, in every legal system but its use differs in each legal system and frequently it is used differently even between courts of the same legal system; b) a comparative analysis under the methodology hereby proposed would provide useful tools in order to address how to “treat like cases alike”. The main aim of this research is to set the conceptual framework for an adequate understanding and study of the doctrine of precedent. To do this, some dimensions of the doctrine of precedent will be added to those enumerated by Michele Taruffo and analyzed not only theoretically, but also under concrete examples of how they work in different legal systems —both of common law and civil law.

The History and Growth of Judicial Review, Volume 2

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Steven Gow Calabresi
Keyword(s):  
Judicial Review ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Civil Law ◽  
The United States ◽  
The European Union ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
Positive Account ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Court ◽  
To Come

This second volume builds on the story of Volume I as to the origins and growth of judicial review in the key G-20 constitutional democracies, which include the United States, the United Kingdom, France, Germany, Japan, Italy, India, Canada, Australia, South Korea, Brazil, South Africa, Indonesia, Mexico, and the European Union. In addition to discussing the judicial review systems of the major civil law countries in this Volume, I also discuss the birth and growth in power of the European Court of Justice and of the European Court of Human Rights, both of which hear cases ffrom common law as well as civil law countries. This Volume considers the four major theories that help to explain the origins of judicial review, which I discussed as to common law countries. Volume II identifies which theories of the origination and growth in power of judicial review apply best in the various countries discussed. Volume II considers not only what gives rise to judicial review originally, but also what leads to the growth of judicial power over time. My positive account of what causes the birth and growth of judicial review in so many very different countries over such a long period of time may have normative implications for those constitution writers who want a strong form of judicial review to come into being.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document