Read more
Informationen zum Autor John Murphy is Professor of Law at Hong Kong University. Klappentext Economic torts play a key role in the development of private law more generally. Indeed, the landmark case of OBG v Allan (2008) provided one of the most important decisions in the whole of the law of torts in the last generation, as the House of Lords sought to bring order to an area of the law that has long been beset by doctrinal and theoretical puzzles. Probably the most enduring question of all in this area is whether the economic torts can be unified. This book argues that the search for unity is a will o' the wisp. More particularly, it shows that although some juridical connections exist between some of these torts, there is far more that separates them than unites them. Offering a unique perspective, this is a landmark publication on the law of economic torts. Vorwort This landmark publication provides an important new statement on the role of economic torts. Zusammenfassung Economic torts play a key role in the development of private law more generally. Indeed, the landmark case of OBG v Allan (2008) provided one of the most important decisions in the whole of the law of torts in the last generation, as the House of Lords sought to bring order to an area of the law that has long been beset by doctrinal and theoretical puzzles. Probably the most enduring question of all in this area is whether the economic torts can be unified. This book argues that the search for unity is a will o’ the wisp. More particularly, it shows that although some juridical connections exist between some of these torts, there is far more that separates them than unites them. Offering a unique perspective, this is a landmark publication on the law of economic torts. Inhaltsverzeichnis 1. Introduction I. Identifying ‘The Economic Torts’ A. One Major Problem B. The Major Problem in Historical Perspective II. The Actions Dealt with in this Book III. Aims and Theses IV. Structure of the Book 2. The Mistake of Monism I. Introduction II. Leading Monistic Accounts III. The Limitations of Monism A. The Conventional View B. The Rights-Based View C. The Kantian View IV. Conclusion 3. Inducing Breach of Contract I. An Inexplicable Action? A. Attempted Rationales B. An Alternative View II. An Action Protecting Purely Economic Interests? A. A Lesson from ‘Status-Based’ Theory B. A Lesson from the ‘Property Thesis’ C. A Lesson from ‘Accessory (or Secondary) Liability Theory’III. Conclusion 4. Torts Requiring Unlawful Means I. Introduction II. Causing Loss by Unlawful Means A. The Conventional View on Scope B. Challenges to the Conventional View on ScopeC. The Rationale of the Unlawful Means Tort III. Unlawful Means Conspiracy A. Distinctiveness of the Tort B. Scope and Potential of Unlawful Means Conspiracy IV. Conclusion 5. Lawful Means Conspiracy and Intimidation 2 I. Lawful Means ConspiracyA. Vitality B. Rationale C. Merits D. Potential E. Reservations F. Final Remarks II. Two-Party Intimidation A. Introduction B. Vitality C. Gist D. Merits and Potential E. Other Reservations F. Final Remarks 6. The Misrepresentation Torts I. Introduction II. Passing Off A. Protected Interest B. The Relevance of Reprehensible Conduct C. The Future D. Final Remarks III. Injurious Falsehood A. Vitality B. Protected Interests C. The Need for Malice D. Future Prospects E. Final Remarks IV. Deceit A. Protected Interests B. Egregious Wrongdoing C. Final Remarks V. Conclusion 7. Connections and Distinctions I. Monism Revisited II. Juridical Links and Distinctions A. Mental Elements B. Unlawful Means C. Conclusion on Juridical Links and Distinctions III. Structural Links and Distinctions IV. Functional Links and Distinctions A. Torts Protecting a Range of Interests B. Torts with a Clear Alternative Ratio...
