scholarly journals The Law of Forcible Entry

1969 ◽  
pp. 271
Author(s):  
W. F. Foster ◽  
Joseph E. Magnet
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Common Law ◽  
The United States ◽  
Supreme Court Of Canada ◽  
Civil Process ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Common ◽  
The Law ◽  
Criminal Matters

The author considers the two contradictory interests which the law on forcible entry must try to harmonize, namely the inviolability of the citizen's dwelling place as against the effective enforcement of the criminal law and civil process. He discusses the common law attitude towards forcible entry in civil and criminal matters and its view of the need for announcement prior to such entry. He also deals with developments in the United States in this area and considers the present state of the law of forcible entry in Canada in the light of the decision of the Supreme Court of Canada in Eccles v. Bourque [197S\ S.C.R. 739.

The Law of Personal Status: Wives, Paupers, and Slaves

2019 ◽  
pp. 173-212
Author(s):  
Lawrence M. Friedman
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Civil Rights ◽  
Common Law ◽  
White Men ◽  
The United States ◽  
Political Rights ◽  
Poor Laws ◽  
Marriage And Divorce ◽  
The Common ◽  
The Law

This chapter discusses the law on marriage and divorce, family property, adoption, poor laws and social welfare, and slavery and African Americans in the United States. In the colonial period, the United States had no courts to handle matters of marriage and divorce. Marriage was a contract—an agreement between a man and a woman. Under the rules of the common law, the country belonged to the whites; and more specifically, it belonged to white men. Women had civil rights but no political rights. There were no formal provisions for adoption. A Massachusetts law, passed in 1851, was one of the earliest, and most significant, general adoption law. The so-called poor laws were the basic welfare laws.

Incorporation of the Law of Nations During the American Revolution—The Case of the San Antonio

1977 ◽  
Vol 71 (2) ◽  
pp. 270-295 ◽  
Author(s):  
Henry J. Bourguignon
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
International Law ◽  
American Revolution ◽  
San Antonio ◽  
Common Law ◽  
The United States ◽  
Law Of Nations ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Law ◽  
Anglo American

In an article published in this Journal in 1932, Professor Edwin Dickinson pointed out that the Supreme Court, in the first thirty years of its existence, dealt with 82 cases which raised questions of international law. The Court and counsel before it repeatedly cited the familiar writers on the law of nations: Grotius, Pufendorf, Bynkershoek, Burlamaqui, Rutherforth, and Vattel. As Dickinson pointed out, “It is an ancient doctrine of the Anglo-American common law that the law of nations is incorporated in and in some sense forms part of the national law.” Largely through decisions based on the principles expressed by the classical writers, the law of nations was early incorporated as part of the law of the United States.

Bhasin v Hrynew - The New Duty of Good Faith in Contract

1969 ◽  
Author(s):  
Brittany Scott
Keyword(s):  
Common Law ◽  
Good Faith ◽  
Supreme Court Of Canada ◽  
The Past ◽  
Legal Traditions ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Common ◽  
The Law ◽  
Contractual Obligations

Over the past number of years, the law surrounding the requirement to operate in good faith in conducting contractual obligations has been a developing principle in common law countries from Australia, to the United Kingdom to Canada. In Canada, this principle has developed separately within the civil and common law legal traditions respectively. While the Quebec Civil Code has historically provided for an expectation of parties to a contract to operate in good faith, the common law in Canada has not been as clear.  Prior to 2014, the Canadian common law duty to negotiate in good faith was an unsettled body of law, recognized in certain areas, but not across the discipline as a whole. It has only been since the Supreme Court of Canada decision in Bhasin v. Hrynew that this duty to negotiate in good faith has been outlined as a coherent set of guiding principles. Parties to a contract are now both bound by a general organizing principle of good faith in contracts and are expected to act honestly in the performance of their contractual obligations. While new to the Canadian common law, numerous cases have been quick to test the court’s interpretation of this change in scope to the law of good faith. As Canadian common law jurisprudence moves forward, this principle will continue to expand and develop.

scholarly journals The Private Investigator and the Right to Privacy

1969 ◽  
pp. 256 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elaine F. Geddes
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Common Law ◽  
The United States ◽  
The Right To Privacy ◽  
Private Investigator ◽  
The Status ◽  
The Common ◽  
The Individual ◽  
The Right

The author examines the law with respect to the status and powers of private investigators and reviews cases in both Canada and the United States involving the activities of private investigators. Possible remedies available against the private investigator, both in tort and criminal law, are reviewed, as well as American cases on the common law of invasion of privacy, Canadian cases under the various provincial Privacy Acts and possible remedies under the Charter of Rights. Privacy is the right of the individual to decide for himself how much of his life, his thoughts, emotions and the facts that are personal to him he will share with others.

scholarly journals Parental Criminal Responsibility for the Misconduct of Their Children: A Consideration

2018 ◽  
Vol 21 ◽  
pp. 1-21
Author(s):  
Charnelle Van der Bijl
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
South African ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Strict Liability ◽  
The United States ◽  
Parental Responsibility ◽  
The Common

This contribution examines parental criminal responsibility for the delinquent acts of their children.  As South African law has been swayed by legal philosophy of Anglo-American jurisprudence, a comparative analysis is undertaken with the United States of America, where this issue has been addressed legislatively in both civil tort law and criminal law. The reasoning behind the implementation of specific legislation in the United States is that the common law principles are rooted on the principles of individualisation, which does not specifically cater for parental liability.  Parental responsibility laws have been challenged constitutionally over the years in the United States. Critics are of the view that such laws interfere with the rights of parents to raise their children and are a form of cruel punishment. Additional criticism raised is that parental responsibility laws impose strict liability on parents. Furthermore, some misgivings have been shed that many parents face challenges of being single parents or poverty, which will be exacerbated with the imposition of fines or imprisonment for the misconduct of their children. Despite these concerns and criticism, it will be shown that these laws have withstood the challenges over many decades, in the United States, in both the fields of the law of tort and criminal law. The common law of tort provides for the liability of parents for the conduct of their child. However, such conduct must be specifically attributable to a parent’s action or inaction. The purpose behind tort parental responsibility legislation focuses not only on providing monetary compensation by parents where their children are unable to do so, but also aims to encourage parents to provide better supervision of their children.  At the opposite end of the spectrum, the focus of statutory criminalisation tends to remain on criminal liability of parents for failing to protect others from their child, due to a failure in supervision and to prevent juvenile delinquency.  The South African law of delict is briefly contiguously considered in the context of parental responsibility laws. The concept of parental criminal responsibility laws under South African law is then considered and proffered as a useful mechanism to regulate misconduct of children currently falling outside the aegis of the criminal law.

Choice of Law Methods in the Private International Law of Contract

1981 ◽  
Vol 18 ◽  
pp. 161-200
Author(s):  
Joost Blom
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
International Law ◽  
Common Law ◽  
The United States ◽  
Private International Law ◽  
Legal Systems ◽  
Choice Of Law ◽  
The Common ◽  
The Law ◽  
Contractual Obligations

This article examines the choice of law methods developed in four legal systems for problems relating to the substantial or essential validity of contracts. The complicated questions of formation and capacity have had to be left aside. The first two parts of this article discussed the choice of law methods used by courts in France, Germany, and the United States. This concluding part deals with the law in England and the common law jurisdictions in Canada, and also, by way of epilogue, with the recently completed European Communities Convention on the law applicable to contractual obligations. Finally, some general conclusions will be offered about the patterns of law that have emerged in the course of this survey.

Torts and Other Wrongs

2019 ◽  
pp. 1-26
Author(s):  
John Gardner
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
New Zealand ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Tort Law ◽  
The United States ◽  
Common Cause ◽  
England And Wales ◽  
The Common ◽  
The Law

This chapter focuses on the law of torts, not in the United States, but in other major common law jurisdictions (England and Wales, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand) in which tort cases are normally adjudicated by judges sitting without juries. It considers the so-called classical interpretation of the common law of torts by John Goldberg and Ben Zipursky, and how they tend to equivocate on an important point of law in a way that puts them at odds with some writers with whom they would do better to make common cause. It suggests that this equivocation is where the law of the United States parts company with the law in the rest of the common law world. The problem, an English lawyer might then teasingly say, is with American tort law rather than with the Goldberg and Zipursky rendition of it.

Uncommon Law: America's Excessive Criminal Law & Our Common-Law Origins

Daedalus ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 143 (3) ◽  
pp. 62-72
Author(s):  
Jonathan Simon
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Justice System ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Social Order ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Common Law ◽  
The United States ◽  
Criminal Courts ◽  
The Common

This essay explores the role that U.S. criminal courts play in shaping the uniquely punitive social order of the United States. U.S. courts have long been defined against the common law of England, from which they emerged. In this essay, I consider the English legacy and suggest that while the United States does draw heavily from common-law traditions, it has also innovated to alter them, a process that has established a criminal justice system even more punitive than that of England.

scholarly journals The Sh(e)aring Economy. Debates on the Law on Takings

Laws ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (3) ◽  
pp. 54
Author(s):  
Nofar Sheffi
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Nineteenth Century ◽  
United States Of America ◽  
Common Law ◽  
The United States ◽  
The Body ◽  
The Common ◽  
The Law ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
The Relationship

Rethinking ‘sharing’ and the relationship between ‘sharing’ and ‘jurisdiction’, this meander proceeds in three parts. It begins with a journey to and through the forests of the nineteenth-century Rhineland, rereading Marx’s journalistic reports on debates in the Sixth Rhine Province Assembly about proposed amendments to forest regulation (including an extension of the definition of ‘wood theft’ to include the gathering of fallen wood) as a reflection on the making of law by legal bodies. From the forests of the Rhineland, the paper journeys to the forests of England, retracing the common story about the development, by legal bodies, of the body of common law principles applicable to ‘innkeeping’. Traveling to and through the ‘concrete jungles’ of the United States of America, the paper concludes with a reflection on Airbnb’s common story of creation as well as debates about the legality of Airbnb, Airbnb-ing, and ‘sharing’.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document