Research on the protection of personal information in Tort Law —Based on Article 111 of Civil Law

2021 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 43-52
Author(s):  
Tian Wei
Keyword(s):  
Personal Information ◽  
Civil Law ◽  
Tort Law

scholarly journals CODIFICATION, CONSOLIDATION, RESTATEMENT? HOW BEST TO SYSTEMISE THE MODERN LAW OF TORT

2021 ◽  
Vol 70 (2) ◽  
pp. 271-305
Author(s):  
Paula Giliker
Keyword(s):  
Comparative Study ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Civil Law ◽  
Tort Law ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Legal Scholarship ◽  
Legal Rules ◽  
The Law ◽  
Codal Provisions ◽  
Code Civil

AbstractThe law of tort (or extra or non-contractual liability) has been criticised for being imprecise and lacking coherence. Legal systems have sought to systemise its rules in a number of ways. While civil law systems generally place tort law in a civil code, common law systems have favoured case-law development supported by limited statutory intervention consolidating existing legal rules. In both systems, case law plays a significant role in maintaining the flexibility and adaptability of the law. This article will examine, comparatively, different means of systemising the law of tort, contrasting civil law codification (taking the example of recent French proposals to update the tort provisions of the Code civil) with common law statutory consolidation and case-law intervention (using examples taken from English and Australian law). In examining the degree to which these formal means of systemisation are capable of improving the accessibility, intelligibility, clarity and predictability of the law of tort, it will also address the role played by informal sources, be they ambitious restatements of law or other means. It will be argued that given the nature of tort law, at best, any form of systemisation (be it formal or informal) can only seek to minimise any lack of precision and coherence. However, as this comparative study shows, further steps are needed, both in updating outdated codal provisions and rethinking the type of legal scholarship that might best assist the courts.

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.

1. Tort: law and system

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-22
Author(s):  
Carol Brennan ◽  
Vera Bermingham
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Civil Law ◽  
Tort Law ◽  
Legal Knowledge ◽  
Related Area ◽  
System P ◽  
Key Points ◽  
Wide Range ◽  
The Law

Without assuming prior legal knowledge, books in the Directions series introduce and guide readers through key points of law and legal debate. Questions, diagrams, and exercises help readers to engage fully with each subject and check their understanding as they progress. In civil law, tort provides remedy for a party who has suffered the breach of a protected interest. Tort law protects a wide range of interests. Currently, negligence is the greatest source of litigation with respect to tort. Torts of trespass to the person protect physical safety while trespass to property governs the ownership of property. The tort of defamation provides remedies for threats to one’s reputation. Another tort-related area deals with the protection of privacy from media intrusion. This chapter discusses the range of activity to which tort law applies and the types of harm for which it provides compensation. It also considers the main interests protected by the law of tort, how the law of tort differs from other branches of the law, and the role of policy and the human rights dimension in the law of tort.

Connecting Tort and Crime: Comparative Legal History in England and Spain since 1850

2009 ◽  
Vol 11 ◽  
pp. 247-288
Author(s):  
Matthew Dyson
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Law ◽  
Legal History ◽  
Complete System ◽  
Civil Law ◽  
Tort Law ◽  
The Other ◽  
Criminal Courts ◽  
English System ◽  
History Of ◽  
The Relationship

Abstract This chapter explores the relationship between tort law and criminal law. In particular it tracks one line of developments in the procedural co-ordination of criminal and civil law: the ability of criminal courts to award compensation for harm. It is a study of legal change or development: how and why law has evolved from the middle of the nineteenth century through to the present day. The chapter is also comparative, looking at the English and Spanish legal systems. The history of powers to compensate has highlighted two fundamentally different ways to resolve claims based on a concurrently tortious and criminal wrong. The English system has slowly moved from disparate and piecemeal provisions to a general if under-theorised system. On the other hand, Spain created a novel and complete system of liability to be administered by the criminal courts. This chapter seeks to trace and explain this development with a view to understanding how much civil and criminal law can perform the same function: compensation.

Privacy

2009 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anita L. Allen
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Civil Law ◽  
Tort Law ◽  
Fourteenth Amendment ◽  
Public Disclosure ◽  
Bill Of Rights ◽  
State Statutes ◽  
The Us ◽  
Us Supreme Court ◽  
Constitutional Thought

The idea of privacy has played a role in constitutional thought, formulations of human rights, and both common and civil law. The US Supreme Court has recognized that five of the original Bill of Rights and the Fourteenth Amendment protect privacy interests. In US tort law, interests against intrusion upon seclusion, public disclosure of private fact, publications placing one in a false light, and misappropriation of a person's name, likeness, or identity are potentially protected through civil actions styled ‘invasions of privacy’. Federal and state statutes protect interests in the privacy of records relating to, inter alia, health, finances, consumer transactions, Internet use, and taxes.

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 status of pets and pretium affectionis

2020 ◽  
Vol 59 (89) ◽  
pp. 335-351
Author(s):  
Srđan Radulović
Keyword(s):  
Legal Status ◽  
Legal Theory ◽  
Focal Point ◽  
Civil Law ◽  
Tort Law ◽  
Solid Base ◽  
Property Law ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
The Republic ◽  
Criminal Legislation

In domestic legal theory, as well as in judicial practice of the Republic of Serbia, there is a widely accepted standpoint that animals are property items, i.e. living movable assets in property law, and property items which increase the risk of damage in tort law. However, both views have been seriously challenged by the adoption of the Animal Welfare Act, and the subsequent amendments introduced into the Serbian criminal legislation. These norms have ultimately contributed to creating a solid base for reconsidering the legal status of animals and treating them as highly distinctive subjects of law. The current legal status of animals, including pets as a special legal category of animals which is the focal point of this paper, is debatable. Yet, the mere hint that there is a possibility to finally overcome the traditional "animal = object" concept creates an obligation to review all other civil law provisions and principles de lege lata, and especially de lege ferenda. In particular, using both analytical and normative method, the author analyzes the relevant provision of the Civil Obligations Act and the Draft Civil Code of Republic of Serbia, and examines the likelihood of awarding compensation (damages) for pretium affectionis (special affection and attachment) in case of death or injury caused to a pet.

scholarly journals Mauritian Tort Law

2020 ◽  
pp. 184-203
Author(s):  
Goran Georgijević
Keyword(s):  
Civil Law ◽  
Tort Law ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Causal Link ◽  
Civil Code ◽  
Tort Liability ◽  
French Case ◽  
Harmful Event

According to the general tort law of Mauritius (articles 1382 through 1384 of the Mauritian Civil Code), three conditions must be met before tort liability may be implemented, namely the existence of harm, the existence of a causal link, and the existence of a harmful event. This paper contains an analysis of the fundamentals of the tort law of Mauritius, which is based on Mauritian case law and French case law and French doctrine, which are considered a persuasive authority in Mauritian Civil Law.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document