Theory versus policy in the reform of admiralty jurisdiction

Q4 Social Sciences International Journal of Private Law Pub Date : 2013-10-01 DOI:10.1504/IJPL.2013.056817
H. Staniland
{"title":"Theory versus policy in the reform of admiralty jurisdiction","authors":"H. Staniland","doi":"10.1504/IJPL.2013.056817","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The enforcement of maritime claims in English admiralty law and jurisdiction is based on the action in rem and the action in personam. The nature of, and relationship between, these actions is traditionally explained on the basis of competing fictions and theories, in particular, the personification theory and the procedural theory, which lead to widely different results in the enforcement of maritime claims. In this respect, many Commonwealth jurisdictions have departed from English law. It is argued that the admiralty jurisdiction and law of Namibia is the same as English law as of 1890; and, in drafting new legislation to repeal and replace the law of 1890, the author contends that the legislation should reflect clear policy objectives and that the competing and unreliable fictions and theories should not serve as a basis for legislative reform. The draft legislation is then subjected to detailed analysis to determine that the policy objectives (serving the interests of both national and international litigants), are achieved.","PeriodicalId":39023,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Private Law","volume":"19 1","pages":"418"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2013-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Private Law","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1504/IJPL.2013.056817","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The enforcement of maritime claims in English admiralty law and jurisdiction is based on the action in rem and the action in personam. The nature of, and relationship between, these actions is traditionally explained on the basis of competing fictions and theories, in particular, the personification theory and the procedural theory, which lead to widely different results in the enforcement of maritime claims. In this respect, many Commonwealth jurisdictions have departed from English law. It is argued that the admiralty jurisdiction and law of Namibia is the same as English law as of 1890; and, in drafting new legislation to repeal and replace the law of 1890, the author contends that the legislation should reflect clear policy objectives and that the competing and unreliable fictions and theories should not serve as a basis for legislative reform. The draft legislation is then subjected to detailed analysis to determine that the policy objectives (serving the interests of both national and international litigants), are achieved.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
海事管辖权改革的理论与政策之争
在英国海事法和管辖权中,海事请求的执行是以对物诉讼和对人诉讼为基础的。这些行为的性质和相互之间的关系传统上是在相互竞争的虚构和理论的基础上解释的,特别是人格化理论和程序理论,这导致了海事索赔执行中截然不同的结果。在这方面,许多英联邦司法管辖区都背离了英国法律。认为纳米比亚的海事管辖权和法律与1890年的英国法律相同;并且,在起草废除和取代1890年法律的新立法时,作者认为,立法应反映明确的政策目标,不应将相互竞争和不可靠的虚构和理论作为立法改革的基础。然后对立法草案进行详细分析,以确定政策目标(服务于国内和国际诉讼当事人的利益)是否得到实现。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
1
期刊最新文献
The evolution of the non-oral modification clause Legal regulation of migration policy in EU countries: current challenges The application of the concept of consideration to smart contracts on a blockchain. The propriety of mandatory arbitration in Nigeria vis-à-vis the doctrine of voluntariness: the imperativeness of charting a new course The evolution of the non-oral modification clause
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1