An Account of the Law Courts at Westminster

2020 ◽  
pp. 257-266
Author(s):  
J. Britton
Keyword(s):  
The Law ◽  
Author(s):  
Molly Shaffer Van Houweling

This chapter studies intellectual property (IP). A hallmark of the New Private Law (NPL) is attentiveness to and appreciation of legal concepts and categories, including the traditional categories of the common law. These categories can sometimes usefully be deployed outside of the traditional common law, to characterize, conceptualize, and critique other bodies of law. For scholars interested in IP, for example, common law categories can be used to describe patent, copyright, trademark, and other fields of IP as more or less “property-like” or “tort-like.” Thischapter investigates both the property- and tort-like features of IP to understand the circumstances under which one set of features tends to dominate and why. It surveys several doctrines within the law of copyright that demonstrate how courts move along the property/tort continuum depending on the nature of the copyrighted work at issue—including, in particular, how well the work’s protected contours are defined. This conceptual navigation is familiar, echoing how common law courts have moved along the property/tort continuum to address disputes over distinctive types of tangible resources.


1983 ◽  
Vol 42 (2) ◽  
pp. 168-188
Author(s):  
David B. Brownlee

The 16 years of labor that George Edmund Street devoted to the Royal Courts of Justice were filled with artistic and political controversy. Amidst that turmoil Street created a design whose pragmatism and visual logic marked the end of the intensely intellectual, High Victorian phase of the Gothic Revival. "Without it," Robert Kerr concluded in 1884, "the whole process of the Revival had been quite incomplete."


The Lancet ◽  
1892 ◽  
Vol 140 (3610) ◽  
pp. 1057
Keyword(s):  
The Law ◽  

2005 ◽  
pp. 95-112
Author(s):  
Shirley Roberts
Keyword(s):  
The Law ◽  

1945 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 107-117
Author(s):  
W. Valentine Ball

It is not always appreciated that before a case is ready for trial, a vast amount of preliminary work has to be carried out. The playgoer who sits before the footlights, sees the actors, and hears them say their parts. He is but dimly conscious of all that has gone before—the playwright toiling at his manuscript, the rehearsals, and the labours of the dresser and the stage carpenter. So a visitor to the Law Courts who sees a judge on the bench provided with all the documents relating to the action, who watches counsel untie the red tape on his brief, and the solicitor produce documents from a dispatch case, is not always alive to the fact that all this has involved a deal of preparation, not only in the office of the solicitor and the chambers of learned counsel, but in the offices of the Supreme Court.


1978 ◽  
Vol 17 (2) ◽  
pp. 66-86 ◽  
Author(s):  
Clive Emsley

As the likelihood of war with revolutionary France grew at the end of 1792 and beginning of 1793, the pro-government press in England reported that a serious plan for an insurrection, scheduled for the first weekend in December 1792, had been nipped in the bud by the authorities. On December 3 The Times stated that, as it had not wished to create alarm, it had not previously mentioned the full facts of the seditious attempts being made in the country. These attempts, the newspaper maintained, had prompted almost daily meetings of the Cabinet climaxing in a meeting at Lord Grenville's house which had lasted until one a.m. on the preceding Saturday morning (December 1). It was from this meeting that the Cabinet had issued the royal proclamation which embodied part of the militia and which deplored the ineffectiveness of the May 1792 proclamation against seditious meetings and writings. Three weeks later, beneath the headline “Revolution Plans,” the World reported that two parties were involved in the projected insurrection: the “moderates” who sought first the destruction of the House of Lords, the Herald's Office, and the Horse Guards, and then the enlarging of the Commons; and those whose plans were “more extensive” and who would have gone on to destroy St. James's Palace, the Bank, the law courts, the prisons, the customs house, and excise office. A month later, under the headline “Project of an Insurrection,” the London Chronicle gave similar details of a plot “to overturn the government and the constitution of this country.”


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document