Download Free The Evolution Of Responsabilite Du Fait Des Choses In French Tort Law Book in PDF and EPUB Free Download. You can read online The Evolution Of Responsabilite Du Fait Des Choses In French Tort Law and write the review.

This book will compare various different European Tort law regimes with emphasis on indirect liability for things. French courts seem to have developed the notion of responsibility without fault in such a way and to such an extent that it seems, prima facie, that the custodian is responsible for any damage which is caused by the thing under his custody, and that he cannot simply prove the absence of his fault in order to escape liability. The thesis looks at the mechanisms of this notion, together with the possible exonerations available as a defence for the defendant. The rigorous approach to civil responsibility in the Code Civil had to be revised by jurists at the end of the nineteenth century. This is mainly because the precarious condition of victims of accidents of work necessitated such re-evaluation. In most countries, liability is based on the classical notion of fault. Germany was the first country to deviate from the principle of fault, although this was originally very limited and only a closed group of victims could benefit. Originally, the wording of the French article, on which today liability without fault is based, was interpreted as referring only to liability for animals and buildings. Eventually, however, the meaning was extended to include all things which cause harm, and not only buildings or animals. In French law the position is very clear. There are only three conditions for exoneration: force majeure, acts of third parties, contributory fault. At Common Law, we find the court-developed concept of 'res ipsa loquitur'. This maxim means that the thing speaks for itself. It allows the claimant to succeed in an action for negligence even when there is absolutely no evidence as to what caused the accident and therefore of whether it was attributable to negligence on the part of the defendant. Under Austrian Law, while the principle of fault is the most important pillar of the law of delict, it is to be observed that the Austrian court has applied by analogy the provisions of strict liability to circumstances not provided for by the law. The position in Malta seems to be that the sections of fault liability cannot be extended by analogy to other instances not found in the law. The thesis will arrive to a conclusion as to whether the principle of liability without fault would be a better alternative to Maltese fault liability.
This revised second edition of Comparative Tort Law: Global Perspectives offers an updated and enriched framework for analysing and understanding the current state of tort law around the world. Using a critical comparative methodology, it covers not only the common tort law issues but also many jurisdictions often overlooked in the mainstream literature. Contributions explore illuminating case studies from tort systems in Europe, the US, Latin America, Asia and sub-Saharan Africa, including new chapters specifically discussing tort law in Brazil, India and Russia.
A study of how established rules of tort law have responded to technological change.
The imposition of strict liability in tort law is controversial, and its theoretical foundations are the object of vigorous debate. Why do or should we impose strict liability on employers for the torts committed by their employees, or on a person for the harm caused by their children, animals, activities, or things? In responding to this type of questions, legal actors rely on a wide variety of justifications. Justifying Strict Liability explores, in a comparative perspective, the most significant arguments that are put forward to justify the imposition of strict liability in four legal systems, two common law, England and the United States, and two civil law, France and Italy. These justifications include: risk, accident avoidance, the 'deep pockets' argument, loss-spreading, victim protection, reduction in administrative costs, and individual responsibility. By looking at how these arguments are used across the four legal systems, this book considers a variety of patterns which characterise the reasoning on strict liability. The book also assesses the justificatory weight of the arguments, showing that these can assume varying significance in the four jurisdictions and that such variations reflect different views as to the values and goals which inspire strict liability and tort law more generally. Overall, the book seeks to improve our understanding of strict liability, to shed light on the justifications for its imposition, and to enhance our understanding of the different tort cultures featuring in the four legal systems studied.
rectify. Readership: Academics in the areas of comparative law, tort law, legal history, and Roman law.
This book takes an original and comparative approach to issues of causation in tort law across many European legal systems.
This three-volume set contains the results of the second and final stage of an AHRC-funded project which aims to examine the nature of legal development in Western Europe since 1850, focusing on liability for fault. By bringing together experts with different disciplinary backgrounds - comparative lawyers and legal historians, all with an understanding of modern tort law in their own systems - and getting them to work collaboratively, the books produce a more nuanced comparative legal history and one which is theoretically ...
Explains the development of tort law and criminal law in England by reference to other legal systems from 1850-2020.