ISBN: 9781841131245 - tortious liability of statutory bodies: a comparative look at five cases (14 risultati)

Condizione: Good. Pages intact with minimal writing/highlighting. The binding may be loose and creased. Dust jackets/supplements are not included. Stock photo provided. Product includes identifying sticker. Better World Books: Buy Books. Do Good.

Condizione: Poor. This is an ex-library book and may have the usual library/used-book markings inside.This book has hardback covers. In poor condition, suitable as a reading copy. Dust jacket in poor condition. Please note the Image in this listing is a stock photo and may not match the covers of the actual item,350grams, ISBN:9781841131245.…

Hardcover. Condizione: As New. Condizione sovraccoperta: As New. As New hardcover book. We have taken the liberty of protecting the dustjacket in a clear removable brodart cover. We ship promptly from the United States and in a box.

Hardcover. Condizione: Very Good. This book is in very good condition; no remainder marks. Dustjacket does have some shelfwear. Inside pages are clean.

Condizione: Brand New. New. US edition. Expediting shipping for all USA and Europe orders excluding PO Box. Excellent Customer Service.

Condizione: New. This study of 5 leading cases questions the validity of their arguments and assumptions in light of the decision in Osman v. UK. Num Pages: 184 pages, black & white illustrations. BIC Classification: 1DBKE; 1DBKW; LAM; LNV. Category: (P) Professional & Vocational; (UP) Postgraduate, Research & Scholarly; (UU) Undergraduate. Dimension: 129 x 194 x 14. Weight in Grams: 360. . 1999. 1st Edition. hardcover. . . . . …

Condizione: New. This study of 5 leading cases questions the validity of their arguments and assumptions in light of the decision in Osman v. UK. Num Pages: 184 pages, black & white illustrations. BIC Classification: 1DBKE; 1DBKW; LAM; LNV. Category: (P) Professional & Vocational; (UP) Postgraduate, Research & Scholarly; (UU) Undergraduate. Dimension: 129 x 194 x 14. Weight in Grams: 360. . 1999. 1st Edition. hardcover. . . . . Books ship from the US and Ireland. …

Hardcover. Condizione: Brand New. 171 pages. 8.00x5.50x0.75 inches. In Stock.

Hardcover. Condizione: new. Hardcover. In a number of important decisions such as Stovin v. Wise,X v. Bedfordshire, Barrett v. Enfield London Borough Council and others, English courts have been forced to grapple with the important issue of tortious liability of statutory bodies. Following the Hill decision, they opted for a wide non-liability rule on a variety of policy and economic efficiency grounds. Yet many of their arguments have been considered and rejected by both German and French courts when deciding factually equivalent situations.This study analyses five leading English cases in a comparative and economic way and questions the validity of their assumptions as well as their arguments in the light of the recent important decision of the Strasbourg Court of Human Rights in Osman v. UK.This thought-provoking book, written by two English academics from Oxford and Cambridge Universities, in collaboration with two leading authorities from the Universities of Paris and Munich, should provide food for thought for judges, practitioners, academics and students for years to come. This book will be essential reading for scholars and practitioners interested in public law, human rights, comparative methodology, and tort law. This study of 5 leading cases questions the validity of their arguments and assumptions in light of the decision in Osman v. UK. This item is printed on demand. Shipping may be from multiple locations in the US or from the UK, depending on stock availability.…

Hardback. Condizione: New. This item is printed on demand. New copy - Usually dispatched within 5-9 working days.

Hardcover. Condizione: new. Hardcover. In a number of important decisions such as Stovin v. Wise,X v. Bedfordshire, Barrett v. Enfield London Borough Council and others, English courts have been forced to grapple with the important issue of tortious liability of statutory bodies. Following the Hill decision, they opted for a wide non-liability rule on a variety of policy and economic efficiency grounds. Yet many of their arguments have been considered and rejected by both German and French courts when deciding factually equivalent situations.This study analyses five leading English cases in a comparative and economic way and questions the validity of their assumptions as well as their arguments in the light of the recent important decision of the Strasbourg Court of Human Rights in Osman v. UK.This thought-provoking book, written by two English academics from Oxford and Cambridge Universities, in collaboration with two leading authorities from the Universities of Paris and Munich, should provide food for thought for judges, practitioners, academics and students for years to come. This book will be essential reading for scholars and practitioners interested in public law, human rights, comparative methodology, and tort law. This study of 5 leading cases questions the validity of their arguments and assumptions in light of the decision in Osman v. UK. This item is printed on demand. Shipping may be from our UK warehouse or from our Australian or US warehouses, depending on stock availability.…

Condizione: New. Dieser Artikel ist ein Print on Demand Artikel und wird nach Ihrer Bestellung fuer Sie gedruckt. This study of 5 leading cases questions the validity of their arguments and assumptions in light of the decision in Osman v. UK.InhaltsverzeichnisThe basic principle of tort law a first look at the five cases and problems they raise.…

Buch. Condizione: Neu. Tortious Liability of Statutory Bodies | A Comparative Look at 5 Cases | Basil S Markesinis (u. a.) | Buch | Englisch | 1999 | Bloomsbury 3PL | EAN 9781841131245 | Verantwortliche Person für die EU: Libri GmbH, Europaallee 1, 36244 Bad Hersfeld, gpsr[at]libri[dot]de | Anbieter: preigu Print on Demand.…

Buch. Condizione: Neu. nach der Bestellung gedruckt Neuware - Printed after ordering - In a number of important decisions such as Stovin V. Wise, X v. Bedfordshire, Barrett v. Enfield London Borough Council and others, English courts have been forced to grapple with the important issues of tortious liability of statutory bodies. Following the HILL decision, they opted for a wide non-liability rule on a variety of policy and economic efficiency grounds. Yet many of their arguments have been considered and rejected by both German and French courts when deciding factually equivalent situations. This study analyzes five leading English cases in a comparative and economic way and questions the validity of their assumptions as well as their arguments in the light of the recent important decision of the Strasgbourg Court of Human Rights in Osman v. UK. This thought-provoking book, written by two English academics from Foxford and Cambridge Universities, in collaboration with two leading authorities from the Universities of Paris and Munich, should provide food for thought for judges, practitioners, academics and students for years to come. This book will be essential reading for scholars and practitioners interested in public law, human rights, comparative methodology, and tort law.…