Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
  1. Home
  2. Search

Refine search

Refine search

Access:
Content type:
Publication date:
Apply   From and To filters
Subject: Show more
Journals Show more
Publishers: Show more
Societies Show more
Series: Show more
Collections: Show more

Actions for selected content:

Select all | Deselect all
  • View selected items
  • Export citations
  • Download PDF (zip)
  • Save to Kindle
  • Save to Dropbox
  • Save to Google Drive

Save Search

You can save your searches here and later view and run them again in "My saved searches".

Please provide a title, maximum of 40 characters.
Cancel
×

1 results

  • 2 - An Idealistic but Troublesome Impulse

  • Jan Paulsson
  • Book:
    The Unruly Notion of Abuse of Rights
    Published online:
    16 July 2020
    Print publication:
    06 August 2020, pp 17-35

  • Summary

    ‘Abuse of rights’ cannot be defined without using open-textured formulations which impede predictability. Bin Cheng did not call abuse of rights a principle, but a theory. In his laudatory preface of Jean-David Roulet’s comprehensive rejection of the notion that it could serve as a rule of international law, Cheng in fact declined to take a position as to ‘the place of the theory in international law’. Among national legal systems, the most notable movement to establish a principle of abuse of rights (expressed nowhere in the French Civil Code) arose in France at the end of the nineteenth century. It was, and remains, controversial. The common law has found ways to place limitations on the attempted exercise of rights without using the generic reference to abuse as a rule of decision. Conceptually, the notion of abuse of rights is not a necessary corollary to that of good faith.