Muutke küpsiste eelistusi

E-raamat: Law of Private Nuisance

Teised raamatud teemal:
  • Formaat - PDF+DRM
  • Hind: 87,75 €*
  • * hind on lõplik, st. muud allahindlused enam ei rakendu
  • Lisa ostukorvi
  • Lisa soovinimekirja
  • See e-raamat on mõeldud ainult isiklikuks kasutamiseks. E-raamatuid ei saa tagastada.
  • Raamatukogudele
    • Hart e-raamatud
Teised raamatud teemal:

DRM piirangud

  • Kopeerimine (copy/paste):

    ei ole lubatud

  • Printimine:

    ei ole lubatud

  • Kasutamine:

    Digitaalõiguste kaitse (DRM)
    Kirjastus on väljastanud selle e-raamatu krüpteeritud kujul, mis tähendab, et selle lugemiseks peate installeerima spetsiaalse tarkvara. Samuti peate looma endale  Adobe ID Rohkem infot siin. E-raamatut saab lugeda 1 kasutaja ning alla laadida kuni 6'de seadmesse (kõik autoriseeritud sama Adobe ID-ga).

    Vajalik tarkvara
    Mobiilsetes seadmetes (telefon või tahvelarvuti) lugemiseks peate installeerima selle tasuta rakenduse: PocketBook Reader (iOS / Android)

    PC või Mac seadmes lugemiseks peate installima Adobe Digital Editionsi (Seeon tasuta rakendus spetsiaalselt e-raamatute lugemiseks. Seda ei tohi segamini ajada Adober Reader'iga, mis tõenäoliselt on juba teie arvutisse installeeritud )

    Seda e-raamatut ei saa lugeda Amazon Kindle's. 

Like any area of the law, the law of nuisance can be difficult to understand, because the law is the accumulation of a great many judicial decisions. Judges, of course, give explanations for their decisions, and it is always important to give due consideration to the explanations offered. But, given that judges make decisions in response to particular problems that they are required to solve - cases, in other words - it is hardly surprising that the explanations they provide frequently conflict with other explanations provided by other courts looking to solve different problems or indeed with the decisions that those courts reached. When one gathers these explanations together, inconsistencies can result, and when the explanations offered by judges are brought together, they typically fail to provide a coherent analysis of the law. It is therefore necessary to go beyond the explanations offered by the courts. How does the law of nuisance fit into the picture? This innovative book - concerned only with the law of private nuisance - does not attempt an analysis of public or statutory nuisances. These actions are called nuisances because they respond to troublesome events that share a similar character (noise, fumes, etc.). And, it is characteristic of the common law to think that its actions are to be understood in terms of the unwanted events (i.e. loss) to which they respond. Instead, the book examines those issues most important to our understanding of the law, and it shows that those issues, and by implication the others that are not canvassed, can be understood in a coherent and systematic fashion. With its fresh perspective, the book is best understood as advancing a suggestion: that the law of nuisance is better understood by rejecting the contemporary understanding of it and beginning again with an approach the focuses on the prioritizing of property rights. Even though it is only a beginning, the book places considerable emphasis on the concept of use. It is an engaging and original study that will be of interest to academics and practitioners working in the area of tort law. (Series: Hart Studies in Private Law - Vol. 10)

Like any area of the law, the law of nuisance can be difficult to understand, because the law is the accumulation of a great many judicial decisions. Judges, of course, give explanations for their decisions, and it is always important to give due consideration to the explanations offered. But, given that judges make decisions in response to particular problems that they are required to solve - cases, in other words - it is hardly surprising that the explanations they provide frequently conflict with other explanations provided by other courts looking to solve different problems or indeed with the decisions that those courts reached. When one gathers these explanations together, inconsistencies can result, and when the explanations offered by judges are brought together, they typically fail to provide a coherent analysis of the law. It is therefore necessary to go beyond the explanations offered by the courts. How does the law of nuisance fit into the picture? This innovative book - concerned only with the law of private nuisance - does not attempt an analysis of public or statutory nuisances. These actions are called nuisances because they respond to troublesome events that share a similar character (noise, fumes, etc.). And, it is characteristic of the common law to think that its actions are to be understood in terms of the unwanted events (i.e. loss) to which they respond. Instead, the book examines those issues most important to our understanding of the law, and it shows that those issues, and by implication the others that are not canvassed, can be understood in a coherent and systematic fashion. With its fresh perspective, the book is best understood as advancing a suggestion: that the law of nuisance is better understood by rejecting the contemporary understanding of it and beginning again with an approach the focuses on the prioritizing of property rights. Even though it is only a beginning, the book places considerable emphasis on the concept of use. It is an engaging and original study that will be of interest to academics and practitioners working in the area of tort law. (Series: Hart Studies in Private Law)

Arvustused

This is an important book. -- R.A. Buckley * The Cambridge Law Journal, Volume 73 * ... an extremely interesting, original and significant contribution to writing about the law of torts, and it is a real credit to Professor Beever that his arguments are expressed in a way that is so concise, clear and engaging. -- Roderick Bagshaw * Law Quarterly Review, Volume 130 * ...an engaging, insightful, and eminently readable text...I very much enjoyed reading this book. Beever has an engaging style of writing, speaks in plain language, is knowledgeable about the law, and demonstrates impressive insight. -- Lewis N. Klar Q.C. * Canadian Business Law Journal, Vol 56 * [ A] bold an stimulating book... -- Paula Giliker * Yearbook of European Tort Law, 2013 *

Acknowledgements vii
Table of Cases
xi
Table of Legislation
xv
Table of Conventions, Treaties etc
xvi
1 Introduction
1(4)
I General
1(1)
II Outlook
2(2)
III Scope
4(1)
IV Use
4(1)
2 The Conventional View
5(9)
I A Debate: A Comment on Style
5(1)
II The View
6(1)
III An Account of the Law
7(2)
IV Two Specific Difficulties with the Conventional View
9(4)
V Conclusion
13(1)
3 The Grounds of Liability
14(14)
I Finding the Ground
14(7)
II Examining the Ground
21(1)
III The Structure of Analysis
22(3)
IV The Case Law
25(3)
4 Illustrations of the General Principle
28(15)
I The Rule of Give and Take, Live and Let Live
28(1)
II The Location
29(4)
III The Sensitivity of the Claimant
33(4)
IV The Duration of the Interference
37(2)
V Isolated Events
39(4)
5 The Activity
43(16)
I The Description of the Parties' Activities
43(8)
II The Malice Doctrine
51(8)
6 Coming to a Nuisance
59(10)
I Bliss v Hall
59(1)
II Sturges v Bridgman
60(1)
III Miller v Jackson
61(4)
IV Kennaway v Thompson
65(1)
V Why `Who Got There First?' Does Not Matter
65(2)
VI Miller v Jackson Revisited
67(2)
7 A Nuisance Coming to You
69(26)
I Three Views
69(1)
II The Traditional Law
70(1)
III The Slide to Negligence
71(5)
IV Criticism of the Contemporary Approach
76(3)
V An Alternative Approach
79(6)
VI Revisiting the Case Law
85(10)
8 Fault and Foreseeability
95(12)
I Introduction
95(1)
II Fault, Negligence and Foreseeability
96(4)
III Foreseeability and Nuisance
100(5)
IV Justifying Strict Liability
105(2)
9 The Rule in Rylands v Fletcher
107(11)
I The Relationship between Nuisance and Rylands v Fletcher
107(8)
II The Place of Rylands v Fletcher in the Modern Law
115(3)
10 The Parties
118(19)
I Standing: Who Can Sue?
118(7)
II Identifying the Defendant: Who Can Be Sued?
125(12)
11 Statutory Authority
137(8)
12 Remedies
145(11)
I Injunctions
145(8)
II Remoteness
153(3)
13 Conclusion
156(3)
Bibliography 159(2)
Index 161
Allan Beever is Professor of Law at the University of South Australia, Adelaide.