Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dk4vv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T09:25:19.407Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Law of Tort: Butterworths Common Law Series, edited by Ken Oliphant. London: LexisNexis Butterworths, 2007, 2nd edn, ccxxvii + 1651 + (index) 81pp (£242.00 hardback). ISBN 978-1-4057-1240-8.

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 January 2018

John Murhpy
John Murhpy*
Affiliation:
School of Law, University of Manchester
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Book Review
Information
Legal Studies , Volume 28 , Issue 4 , December 2008 , pp. 634 - 637
Copyright
Copyright © Society of Legal Scholars 2008

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

9. Three possible exceptions are chapters 9–11, which seem to this reviewer to have been put together according to an unnecessarily fussy series of headings and sub-headings.

10. Oliphant, K (ed) The Law of Tort (London: LexisNexis Butterworths, 2nd edn, 2007) p ix.Google Scholar

11. [2007] UKHL 21, [2008] 1 AC 1.

12. Total Network SL v HM Revenue and Customs [2008] UKHL 19, [2008] 2 WLR 711.

13. See, eg, HM Commissioners of Customs and Excise v Barclays Bank plc [2006] UKHL 28, [2007] 1 AC 181 (duty of care), Barker v Corus UK Ltd [2006] UKHL 20, [2006] 2 AC 572 (causation) and Transco v Stockport MBC [2003] UKHL 61, [2004] 2 AC 1 (the rule in Rylands v Fletcher).

14. I say ‘seemingly’ because it is possible that all that is truly new is the willingness openly to attribute to academics certain influential thoughts or ideas.

15. One probable exception is the incredibly brief treatment of the complex law on causation-in-fact in chapter 14.

16. I am conscious of having deployed this less-than-perfect approach myself: see Murphy, J Street on Torts (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2007).Google Scholar