Read more
These essays illustrate the advantages of 'reflexive' tort scholarship by contrasting the reflexive scholarship of judicial analysis with grand theory, then applying reflexive scholarship to the tort of negligence. The final essay presents a wider argument about human responsibility and legal conduct.
List of contents
- Introduction
- 1.: Taking the Judges Seriously versus Grand Theories
- 2.: Cooperation and Economic Self-Reliance in Commercial Arrangements
- 3.: Conceptual Interplay between Elements of the Tort of Negligence
About the author
Jane Stapleton QC FBA is an academic who has taught common law subjects, especially the law of torts, in Oxford, Cambridge, the European University Institute, and the United States. She is an Honorary Bencher of Gray's Inn, a Council Member of the American Law Institute, and an Emeritus Distinguished Research Professor at the Australian National University. Her awards include the American Bar Association's Robert B. McKay Law Professor Award, the Association of American Law Schools' Prosser Award, the Wedderburn Prize, and the John G. Fleming Prize. She is an Emeritus Fellow of Balliol College and Master of Christ's College Cambridge.
Summary
These essays illustrate the advantages of 'reflexive' tort scholarship by contrasting the reflexive scholarship of judicial analysis with grand theory, then applying reflexive scholarship to the tort of negligence. The final essay presents a wider argument about human responsibility and legal conduct.
Additional text
Stapleton argues her case in a concise and readable manner, providing the practitioner with considerable food for thought.
