scholarly journals The legal status of human biological material used for research

2021 ◽  
Vol 138 (4) ◽  
pp. 881-907
Author(s):  
Donrich W Thaldar ◽  
Bonginkosi Shozi
Keyword(s):  
Biological Material ◽  
Legal Status ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Research Participant ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Research Context ◽  
Research Institution ◽  
Statutory Requirement ◽  
The Common ◽  
Human Biological Material

Whether human biological material (‘HBM’) in the research context is susceptible of ownership is contested, yet under-investigated. This situation leads to legal uncertainty for local scientists and their international collaborators. This article presents a comprehensive analysis of the topic — investigating both common law and statutory law — and concludes that HBM in the research context is indeed susceptible of ownership. First, since the common law is dynamic, it should recognise the reality that HBM has become useful in the research context and should therefore treat HBM in this context as susceptible of being owned. This aligns with the general trend in comparative foreign case law. Secondly, since relevant statutes consistently use the legal-technical term ‘donation’ to denote a situation where HBM is provided by a research participant to a research institution for the purposes of research, the transfer of ownership in the donated HBM from the research participant to the research institution is a statutory requirement. This necessarily implies that HBM in the research context is indeed susceptible of ownership and, moreover, that HBM in the research context is owned by research institutions and not research participants.

Dismantling Doodeward: Guided Discretion as the Superior Basis for Property Rights in Human Biological Material

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kate Falconer
Keyword(s):  
Property Rights ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Human Body ◽  
Biological Material ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Legal Question ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Guided Discretion ◽  
Human Biological Material

For over a century the Australian High Court’s decision in Doodeward v Spence has dominated questions of property rights in the human body. Beginning with the Supreme Court of Western Australia’s decision in Roche v Douglas in 2000, however, Australian courts have developed an alternative ‘guided discretion’ approach to finding property rights in human biological material. This approach provides a normative framework for judges deciding the property question. The existence of two legal bases that answer the same legal question within the Australian common law is unnecessary and undesirable. This article examines the case law applying the more recent guided discretion approach and identifies its three essential features. It then presents four arguments as to why Doodeward should be superseded by the guided discretion approach in questions of property rights in human biological material.

scholarly journals ROLE OF FICTIONS IN REGULATION OF PROPERTY RELATIONS IN THE MEDIEVAL ENGLISH LAW

2016 ◽  
pp. 0-0
Author(s):  
Роман Рыбаков ◽  
Roman Rybakov
Keyword(s):  
Common Law ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Historical Method ◽  
Property Relations ◽  
Legal Method ◽  
The Common ◽  
Legal Fictions ◽  
Interpretation Method

The article is devoted to legal fictions in regulating property relations in the English medieval common law (XIII—XVII centuries). Fictions are explained as features influencing the development of law, means of expansion of courts’ jurisdiction and mechanisms of the development of remedies protecting property relations. The article focuses on the role of fiction during the appellate review stage. Relevant case law is analyzed in this article. In this research the author uses the following set of methods of scientific cognition: dialectical method, historical method as well as special scientific research methods, such as technical legal method, comparative law method, formal legal method and legal interpretation method. This research results in better understanding of the role of fictions during the appellate review stage and provides analysis of differences between legal fictions used in the medieval civil law and the common law. In conclusion, the author suggests a classification of legal fictions’ functions in the medieval English common law.

Part VIII Remedies For Default, 27 Debt and Other Agreed Sums

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrews Neil
Keyword(s):  
Common Law ◽  
Practical Importance ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Fundamental Principle ◽  
Breach Of Contract ◽  
Self Help ◽  
Liquidated Damages ◽  
Specific Performance ◽  
The Common ◽  
Judicial Remedies

This Part mostly concerns judicial remedies for breach of contract (the self-help remedy of forfeiture of a deposit is noted at [27.109]). The chapter sequence reflects both the division between Common Law (chapters 27 and 28) and Equity (chapter 29) but, more importantly, the practical importance of the judicial remedies, debt mattering more than damages, and in turn damages more than specific performance or injunctions. And so chapter 27 concerns ‘Debt’ (but agreed damages, ie liquidated damages clauses, are treated in the same chapter because the sum payable is, by definition, fixed or calculable in advance; but technically, agreed damages are damages and not a cause of action sounding in debt). Chapter 28 concerns damages, that is, compensation. Damages is a branch of the law which continues to generate a mass of intricate case law. Finally, chapter 29 concerns the equitable remedies of specific performance, injunctions, account of profits, and declarations. It is a fundamental principle that specific performance can be granted only if the Common Law remedies (debt and damages) are inadequate on the relevant facts. Chapter 27: The predominant claim for contractual default is the action for debt, to compel payment. Statistically this is the front-runner amongst remedies for breach. The availability of interest is also noted in this chapter.

3. Consent

2021 ◽  
pp. 37-58
Author(s):  
Jo Samanta ◽  
Ash Samanta
Keyword(s):  
Public Policy ◽  
Information Disclosure ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Mental Capacity ◽  
Best Interests ◽  
Mental Capacity Act 2005 ◽  
Relevant Case ◽  
The Common ◽  
Mental Capacity Act

This chapter deals with consent as a necessary precondition for medical treatment of competent adults. It provides an overview of the common law basis of the Mental Capacity Act 2005, followed by discussion of issues relating to information disclosure, public policy, and the key case of Montgomery and how this applies to more recent cases. It considers the statutory provisions for adults who lack capacity, exceptions to the requirement to treat patients who lack capacity in their best interests, and consent involving children under the Children Act 1989. Gillick competence, a concept applied to determine whether a child may give consent, is also explained. Relevant case law, including Gillick, which gave rise to the concept, are cited where appropriate.

Law Making

2019 ◽  
pp. 206-238
Author(s):  
John Baker
Keyword(s):  
Nineteenth Century ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Symbiotic Relationship ◽  
Legal Change ◽  
Inns Of Court ◽  
History Of ◽  
The Common ◽  
Common Learning ◽  
Law Making

This chapter examines the history of case-law, legislation, and equity, with particular reference to legal change. The common law was evidenced by judicial precedent, but single decisions were not binding until the nineteenth century. It was also rooted in professional understanding, the ‘common learning’ acquired in the inns of court. It was based on ‘reason’, operating within a rigid procedural framework. Legal change could be effected by fictions, equity, and legislation, but (except during the Interregnum) there was little systematic reform before the nineteenth century. Legislation was external to the common law, but it had to be interpreted by common-law judges and so there was a symbiotic relationship between statute-law and case-law. Codification has sometimes been proposed, but with limited effect.

7. Privity of contract and third party rights

2021 ◽  
pp. 307-358
Author(s):  
Robert Merkin ◽  
Séverine Saintier
Keyword(s):  
Common Law ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Contract Law ◽  
Third Parties ◽  
Third Party ◽  
The Third ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Common ◽  
Contractual Obligations ◽  
Privity Of Contract

Poole’s Casebook on Contract Law provides a comprehensive selection of case law that addresses all aspects of the subject encountered on undergraduate courses. This chapter examines privity of contract, its relationship with consideration, and the ability of third parties to enforce contractual provisions for their benefit. The doctrine of privity of contract provides that the benefits of a contract can be enjoyed only by the parties to that contract and only parties can suffer the burdens of the contract. At common law, third party beneficiaries could not enforce a contractual provision in their favour so various devices were employed seeking to avoid privity. Statute now allows for direct third party enforcement but in limited circumstances. This chapter examines the background to privity and the attempted statutory reform in the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 as it has been interpreted in the case law. The chapter also discusses the common law means of avoiding privity as illustrated by the case law, e.g. agency, collateral contracts, and trusts of contractual obligations. Finally, it assesses the remedies available to the contracting party to recover on behalf of the third party beneficiary of the promise, including the narrow and broad grounds in Linden Gardens Trust. It concludes by briefly considering privity and burdens—and the exceptional situations where a burden can be imposed on a person who is not a party to the contract.

9. Employers’ liability and non-delegable duties

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vera Bermingham ◽  
Carol Brennan
Keyword(s):  
Common Law ◽  
Tort Law ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Duty Of Care ◽  
Legal Knowledge ◽  
Key Points ◽  
The Common

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. While tort law is largely based on case law developed by judges through the common law, the liability of occupiers for the injuries suffered by those on their premises is governed by two statutes: the Occupiers’ Liability Act 1957 and the Occupiers’ Liability Act 1984. The chapter explains the scope of an occupier’s liability and how it relates to other aspects of negligence, considers the duty of care owed by occupiers to lawful visitors under the Occupiers’ Liability Act 1957, discusses the duty of care owed by occupiers to trespassers under the Occupiers’ Liability Act 1984 and how it relates to the previous common law duty of care.

Principles of Internet contracting: Illuminating the shadows

2019 ◽  
Vol 48 (4) ◽  
pp. 208-232
Author(s):  
Caterina Gardiner
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
United Kingdom ◽  
Consumer Protection ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Case Law ◽  
The United States ◽  
Contract Law ◽  
Contract Formation ◽  
The Common ◽  
The Relationship

The common law that applies to Internet contract formation could be said to exist in a penumbra—a grey area of partial illumination between darkness and light—where it may be possible to lose sight of established contract law principles. Internet contracts raise difficult issues relating to their formation that challenge traditional contract doctrine. Analysis of case law from the United States, United Kingdom and Ireland illustrates that the courts have not applied contract formation doctrine in a principled or consistent way. There is a tendency for decisions to be reached for policy reasons, for example, to facilitate the development of e-commerce, or to achieve a result that is considered fair, rather than on sound principles of contract law. There may also be some uncertainty arising from the relationship between statutory consumer protection rules and common law contract formation doctrine. The enforceability of Internet contracts in the common law courts remains unpredictable. This article argues that although Internet contracting may raise distinctive contract formation issues, it is possible for the judiciary to invoke the inherent flexibility of the common law, to take into account the specific characteristics of Internet contracts, while still adhering to established contract law doctrine and maintaining a principled approach.

The Common Law, Reasons and Administrative Justice

1994 ◽  
Vol 53 (2) ◽  
pp. 282-302 ◽  
Author(s):  
P.P. Craig
Keyword(s):  
Common Law ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Public Law ◽  
Public Authorities ◽  
General Duty ◽  
House Of Lords ◽  
Recent Developments ◽  
Private And Public ◽  
The Common ◽  
Home Department

The capacity of the common law to develop and evolve is well recognised within both private and public law. This is indeed one of its enduring qualities. The objective of the present article is not, however, to contribute to the jurisprudential debate concerning the nature of the adjudicative process at common law. My object is more modest. It is to consider and place in perspective some of the recent developments which have occurred at common law in relation to the duty of public authorities to provide reasons. It is a well known and oft repeated proposition that there is no general common law duty to furnish the reasons for a decision. It is equally well known that this proposition has been the target of regular attack by those who argue that such a general duty should exist. A reconsideration of both of these propositions is timely in the light of case law developments culminating in the House of Lords' judgment in R. v. Secretary of State for the Home Department, ex p. Doody.

scholarly journals Unresolved Controversies in Suing for Negligence of Tax Officials: Canadian and Australasian Insights and a Primer for Policy Makers' Consideration

2020 ◽  
Vol 68 (2) ◽  
pp. 439-476
Author(s):  
John Bevacqua
Keyword(s):  
New Zealand ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Policy Makers ◽  
The Common ◽  
The Right

There have been numerous recent Canadian cases in which taxpayers have alleged negligence by Canada Revenue Agency officials. This body of rapidly evolving Canadian case law constitutes, at present, the most extensive jurisprudence in the common-law world considering the tortious liability of tax officials. It also exposes fundamental unresolved controversies that inhibit legal clarity and certainty on the limits of the right of taxpayers to sue for the negligence of tax officials. Through comparison with cases in Australia and New Zealand, this article confirms that these unresolved controversies are not unique to Canada. The author proposes a range of options for addressing these issues. Intended as a primer for policy makers' attention and debate, these proposals are drawn from judicial and legislative approaches adopted in Canada, Australia, and New Zealand, and in other broadly comparable common-law jurisdictions.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document