{"title":"诉讼中的保险与投资:诉讼保险与索赔投资的比较法律史","authors":"Willem H. Van Boom","doi":"10.1080/2049677X.2020.1768255","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Today, liability insurance and legal expenses insurance are generally accepted as benefits to the society and the idea of insuring against litigation risks does not repel us. In the past, however, it was held that such litigation insurance was fuelling litigation at best or going against good morals at worst. What are the reasons behind this? And how does this compare to the legal history of investment in litigation gains? Claim investment has been frowned upon for centuries and today a dismissive narrative continues to dog this ‘product’. So, the legal discourses surrounding insurance and claim investments have developed in different directions. How can this be possibly explained? This paper attempts to answer these questions by comparing the historical developments within European jurisdictions of the concept of insurance against litigation loss and that of the concept of litigation investment. Thus, it aims to improve our understanding of historical paths of both phenomena.","PeriodicalId":53815,"journal":{"name":"Comparative Legal History","volume":"8 1","pages":"2 - 26"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2020-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/2049677X.2020.1768255","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Insuring vs. investing in litigation: a comparative legal history of litigation insurance and claim investment\",\"authors\":\"Willem H. Van Boom\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/2049677X.2020.1768255\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Today, liability insurance and legal expenses insurance are generally accepted as benefits to the society and the idea of insuring against litigation risks does not repel us. In the past, however, it was held that such litigation insurance was fuelling litigation at best or going against good morals at worst. What are the reasons behind this? And how does this compare to the legal history of investment in litigation gains? Claim investment has been frowned upon for centuries and today a dismissive narrative continues to dog this ‘product’. So, the legal discourses surrounding insurance and claim investments have developed in different directions. How can this be possibly explained? This paper attempts to answer these questions by comparing the historical developments within European jurisdictions of the concept of insurance against litigation loss and that of the concept of litigation investment. Thus, it aims to improve our understanding of historical paths of both phenomena.\",\"PeriodicalId\":53815,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Comparative Legal History\",\"volume\":\"8 1\",\"pages\":\"2 - 26\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-01-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/2049677X.2020.1768255\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Comparative Legal History\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/2049677X.2020.1768255\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Comparative Legal History","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/2049677X.2020.1768255","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
Insuring vs. investing in litigation: a comparative legal history of litigation insurance and claim investment
Today, liability insurance and legal expenses insurance are generally accepted as benefits to the society and the idea of insuring against litigation risks does not repel us. In the past, however, it was held that such litigation insurance was fuelling litigation at best or going against good morals at worst. What are the reasons behind this? And how does this compare to the legal history of investment in litigation gains? Claim investment has been frowned upon for centuries and today a dismissive narrative continues to dog this ‘product’. So, the legal discourses surrounding insurance and claim investments have developed in different directions. How can this be possibly explained? This paper attempts to answer these questions by comparing the historical developments within European jurisdictions of the concept of insurance against litigation loss and that of the concept of litigation investment. Thus, it aims to improve our understanding of historical paths of both phenomena.
期刊介绍:
Comparative Legal History is an international and comparative review of law and history. Articles will explore both ''internal'' legal history (doctrinal and disciplinary developments in the law) and ''external'' legal history (legal ideas and institutions in wider contexts). Rooted in the complexity of the various Western legal traditions worldwide, the journal will also investigate other laws and customs from around the globe. Comparisons may be either temporal or geographical and both legal and other law-like normative traditions will be considered. Scholarship on comparative and trans-national historiography, including trans-disciplinary approaches, is particularly welcome.