Book contents
- New Private Law Theory
- New Private Law Theory
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Preface
- New Private Law Theory
- Part I Methods and Disciplines
- Part II Social Ordering, Constitutionalism and Private Law
- Part III Transactions and Risk: Private Law and the Market
- 11 Negotiation, the Function of Contract and the ‘Justice of Consensus’
- 12 Knowledge and Information
- 13 Private Power
- 14 Non-discrimination
- 15 Risk, Tort and Liability
- 16 Digital Architecture of Private Law Relations
- 17 Between Market and Hierarchy
- Part IV Persons and Organizations
- Part V Private Law (Rule-Setting) beyond the State
- Index
- References
15 - Risk, Tort and Liability
from Part III - Transactions and Risk: Private Law and the Market
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 09 April 2021
Book contents
- New Private Law Theory
- New Private Law Theory
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Preface
- New Private Law Theory
- Part I Methods and Disciplines
- Part II Social Ordering, Constitutionalism and Private Law
- Part III Transactions and Risk: Private Law and the Market
- 11 Negotiation, the Function of Contract and the ‘Justice of Consensus’
- 12 Knowledge and Information
- 13 Private Power
- 14 Non-discrimination
- 15 Risk, Tort and Liability
- 16 Digital Architecture of Private Law Relations
- 17 Between Market and Hierarchy
- Part IV Persons and Organizations
- Part V Private Law (Rule-Setting) beyond the State
- Index
- References
Summary
On 16 February 2017 the European Court of Justice had to decide the preliminary reference of Elisabeth Schmitt against TÜV Rheinland (Box 15.1). Thousands of women around the world were affected by substandard breast implants. The women brought actions to courts in France, Germany and elsewhere. E. Schmitt’s case is paradigmatic for how courts are struggling to apply tort law to this multifaceted constellation. This case serves as a starter for a discussion of the transformation of liability in the changing economic and political environment.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- New Private Law TheoryA Pluralist Approach, pp. 272 - 297Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2021
References
Josserand, L, ‘L’évolution de la responsabilité (conférence donnée aux Facultés de Droit de Lisbonne, de Coimbre, de Belgrade, de Bucarest, d’Orades, de Bruxells, à l’institut français de Madrid, aux centres juridiques de L’Institut des Hautes Études marocaines à Rabat et á Casablanca)’, in Josserand, L (ed.), Évolutions et Actualités: Conférences de Droit Civil (Paris: Receuil Sirey, 1936), chapter 29, s. 5, (English translation on the book website)Google Scholar
Calabresi, G, ‘Some thoughts on risk distributions and the law of torts’ (1961) 70 Yale Law Journal 499–553Google Scholar
Brüggemeier, G, Common Principles of Tort Law: A Pre-Statement of Law (London: British Institute of International and Comparative Law, 2004)Google Scholar
Calabresi, G, The Future of Law and Economics: Essays in Reform and Recollection (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2016)Google Scholar
van Dam, C, European Tort Law, 2nd ed. (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Geistfeld, M, ‘Risk distribution and the law of torts: carrying Calabresi further’ (2014), 77(2) Law and Contemporary Problems 165–90Google Scholar
De Jong, E, ‘Tort law and judicial risk regulation: bipolar and multipolar risk reasoning in light of tort law’s regulatory effects’ (2018) 9(1) European Journal of Risk Regulation 14–33Google Scholar
Kaplow, L and Shavell, S, Fairness versus Welfare (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2006), pp. 85–154Google Scholar
Wagner, G, ‘The project of harmonising European tort law’ (2005) 42(5) Common Market Law Review 1269–312CrossRefGoogle Scholar