{"title":"Correction by Construction: Dealing with Drafting Errors by Way of Interpretation","authors":"L. Richardson","doi":"10.3366/elr.2023.0813","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3366/elr.2023.0813","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":43268,"journal":{"name":"Edinburgh Law Review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43192581","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Charles Kerrigan (ed), Artificial Intelligence Law and Regulation","authors":"N. Gleeson","doi":"10.3366/elr.2023.0821","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3366/elr.2023.0821","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":43268,"journal":{"name":"Edinburgh Law Review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45673796","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Obtaining the “Main Keys to Wisdom”: Distinguishing “Damages” from other Pecuniary Remedies in Scots Law","authors":"Jonathan Brown","doi":"10.3366/elr.2023.0811","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3366/elr.2023.0811","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":43268,"journal":{"name":"Edinburgh Law Review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47703508","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"“A Number of Interesting Puzzles involving the Law of Agency”: VMS Enterprises Ltd v The Brexit Party Ltd","authors":"L. Macgregor","doi":"10.3366/elr.2023.0812","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3366/elr.2023.0812","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":43268,"journal":{"name":"Edinburgh Law Review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44929006","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The UK formally left the European Union (EU) on 31 January 2020, and entered a transition period until 31 December 2020 (“IP Completion Day”). Thereafter, EU law was no longer binding on the UK as an international source of law, and was replaced by a domestic equivalent, known as “retained EU law”. One of the questions which arose prior to IP Completion Day was how to correct retained EU law in advance of it taking effect, so that it would operate effectively and avoid a so-called “cliff-edge scenario”. Most of these corrections were made using delegated legislation by the UK Government. This was typically done with the consent of the devolved administrations where retained EU law included policy areas within the devolved competences of Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. In Scotland, new processes were introduced to provide the Scottish Parliament with an opportunity to approve such consent being given by the Scottish Government. The purpose of this article is to provide new analysis of the impact of this process and its significance for Scots law and Scottish parliamentary scrutiny, as well as to consider the extent to which the challenges observed with that process have been addressed by the successor process which has been in place since IP Completion Day.
{"title":"Legislating for a Post-Brexit Scotland: Scottish Parliamentary Scrutiny of UK Statutory Instruments on Retained EU Law","authors":"Robert Brett Taylor, Adelyn L M Wilson","doi":"10.3366/elr.2023.0809","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3366/elr.2023.0809","url":null,"abstract":"The UK formally left the European Union (EU) on 31 January 2020, and entered a transition period until 31 December 2020 (“IP Completion Day”). Thereafter, EU law was no longer binding on the UK as an international source of law, and was replaced by a domestic equivalent, known as “retained EU law”. One of the questions which arose prior to IP Completion Day was how to correct retained EU law in advance of it taking effect, so that it would operate effectively and avoid a so-called “cliff-edge scenario”. Most of these corrections were made using delegated legislation by the UK Government. This was typically done with the consent of the devolved administrations where retained EU law included policy areas within the devolved competences of Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. In Scotland, new processes were introduced to provide the Scottish Parliament with an opportunity to approve such consent being given by the Scottish Government. The purpose of this article is to provide new analysis of the impact of this process and its significance for Scots law and Scottish parliamentary scrutiny, as well as to consider the extent to which the challenges observed with that process have been addressed by the successor process which has been in place since IP Completion Day.","PeriodicalId":43268,"journal":{"name":"Edinburgh Law Review","volume":"141 ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41253257","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Niall R Whitty, Unjustified Enrichment","authors":"M. Godfrey","doi":"10.3366/elr.2023.0820","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3366/elr.2023.0820","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":43268,"journal":{"name":"Edinburgh Law Review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47138226","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Interpreting Sexual Offence Verdicts: Public Attitudes to Complainer Anonymity and the “Not Proven” Debate","authors":"A. Tickell, Seonaid Stevenson-McCabe","doi":"10.3366/elr.2023.0814","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3366/elr.2023.0814","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":43268,"journal":{"name":"Edinburgh Law Review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43306561","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Gender Critical Litigation: Reconciling Fair Play for Women and For Women Scotland","authors":"A. Tickell","doi":"10.3366/elr.2022.0796","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3366/elr.2022.0796","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":43268,"journal":{"name":"Edinburgh Law Review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2022-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45740821","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Comparative Observations on the Consequences of Illegality","authors":"J. du Plessis","doi":"10.3366/elr.2022.0787","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3366/elr.2022.0787","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":43268,"journal":{"name":"Edinburgh Law Review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2022-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45346207","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
A. INTRODUCTION In 2017, Professor Martin Hogg published a magisterial monograph on the subject of Obligations: Law and Language. From the outset of that work, the author notes that the words used by the parties to obligational relationships―even obligational relationships which are constituted ex voluntate―do not need to, and indeed do not generally, map on to the “fundamental structural language” of the law. This “fundamental structural language” can be understood as the lexicon comprised of those basic terms which are used by “external observers” of obligational relationships―most often being lawyers, legislators and jurists―to “make sense” of the law of obligations conceptually, as well as of specific undertakings in particular. Words such as ‘promise’, ‘offer’ and ‘unqualified acceptance’, to take some basic examples not directly examined by Hogg for “constraints of space”, might be applied by the parties to a (potentially) obligational relationship. However, the subjective understanding that the parties themselves have of these terms, or their respective intentions in using them, will not necessarily correspond with the objective legal understanding of the relevant words. Within the field of ex lege obligations―that is, those obligations which are imposed by law, or arise juridically―there is less (indeed, usually no) opportunity for the parties to demonstrate their own understanding of the words habitually employed to describe the obligational nexus. It does not matter how a negligent driver who is sued for causing injury to another road user would describe their relationship to the pursuer: the institutional position is that they are delictually liable to repair the damnum [loss] that they wrongfully caused. A party to a frustrated agreement might not think or believe themselves to be ‘unjustifiably enriched’ by possessing something given to them in the expectation of their performance of
{"title":"Medical Intervention and Incapax Patients: The Place of Negotiorum Gestio within Law’s “Fundamental Structural Language”","authors":"Jonathan Brown","doi":"10.3366/elr.2022.0789","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3366/elr.2022.0789","url":null,"abstract":"A. INTRODUCTION In 2017, Professor Martin Hogg published a magisterial monograph on the subject of Obligations: Law and Language. From the outset of that work, the author notes that the words used by the parties to obligational relationships―even obligational relationships which are constituted ex voluntate―do not need to, and indeed do not generally, map on to the “fundamental structural language” of the law. This “fundamental structural language” can be understood as the lexicon comprised of those basic terms which are used by “external observers” of obligational relationships―most often being lawyers, legislators and jurists―to “make sense” of the law of obligations conceptually, as well as of specific undertakings in particular. Words such as ‘promise’, ‘offer’ and ‘unqualified acceptance’, to take some basic examples not directly examined by Hogg for “constraints of space”, might be applied by the parties to a (potentially) obligational relationship. However, the subjective understanding that the parties themselves have of these terms, or their respective intentions in using them, will not necessarily correspond with the objective legal understanding of the relevant words. Within the field of ex lege obligations―that is, those obligations which are imposed by law, or arise juridically―there is less (indeed, usually no) opportunity for the parties to demonstrate their own understanding of the words habitually employed to describe the obligational nexus. It does not matter how a negligent driver who is sued for causing injury to another road user would describe their relationship to the pursuer: the institutional position is that they are delictually liable to repair the damnum [loss] that they wrongfully caused. A party to a frustrated agreement might not think or believe themselves to be ‘unjustifiably enriched’ by possessing something given to them in the expectation of their performance of","PeriodicalId":43268,"journal":{"name":"Edinburgh Law Review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2022-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43406462","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：