Whether you're a student coming to commercial law for the first time, you are studying for your exams or you are a professional who needs to update or refresh your knowledge, this is the study guide that you need. You will quickly learn about the key topics in commercial law and its effects on the law of Scotland. Summaries of essential facts and essentials cases will help you to identify, understand and remember the most important elements of the subject.

From natural law to justifying punishment, and from Marxism to feminism, Duncan Spiers explains the main ideas of jurisprudence in the order that law students usually encounter them on their courses. By extracting the main arguments that lie at the heart of the different positions, he makes the central themes and implications clear.

Tort law and criminal law are closely bound together but their relationship rarely receives sustained and rigorous scrutiny. This is the first significant project in England and Wales to address that shortcoming. Building on growing interest amongst both academics and practitioners in the relationship between tort and crime, it draws together leading experts to chart the field and explore key points of interest.

Causation is a foundational concept in tort law: in claims for compensation, a claimant must demonstrate that the defendant was a cause of the injury suffered in order for compensation to be awarded. Proof of Causation in Tort Law provides a critical, comparative and theoretical analysis of the general proof rules of causation underlying the tort laws of England, Germany and France, as well as the exceptional departures from these rules which each system has made.

When accidents occur and people suffer injuries, who ought to bear the loss? Tort law offers a complex set of rules to answer this question, but up to now philosophers have offered little by way of analysis of these rules. In eight essays commissioned for this volume, leading legal theorists examine the philosophical foundations of tort law. Amongst the questions they address are the following: how are the notions at the core of tort practice (such as responsibility, fault, negligence, due care, and duty to repair) to be understood?

Landmark Cases in the Law of Tort contains thirteen original essays on leading tort cases, ranging from the early nineteenth century to the present day. It is the third volume in a series of collected essays on landmark cases (the previous two volumes having dealt with restitution and contract). The cases examined raise a broad range of important issues across the law of tort, including such diverse areas as acts of state and public nuisance, as well as central questions relating to the tort of negligence.

Tort law, a fundamental building block of every legal system, features prominently in mass culture and political debates. As this pioneering anthology reveals, tort law is not simply a collection of legal rules and procedures, but a set of cultural responses to the broader problems of risk, injury, assignment of responsibility, compensation, valuation, and obligation.

Independent of criminal or contract law, Tort law provides individuals and groups with redress for injury to every dimension of life from physical injury, to property damage, to personal insult. Over past decades no body of law within the civil justice system has experienced greater ferment than the law of Torts. In the US, state courts, federal courts, and the Supreme Court have all been active in the development of Tort policy.

The fields of tort and crime have much in common in practice, particularly in how they both try to respond to wrongs and regulate future behaviour. Despite this commonality in fact, fascinating difficulties have hitherto not been resolved about how legal systems co-ordinate (or leave wild) the border between tort and crime. What is the purpose of tort law and criminal law, and how do you tell the difference between them? Do criminal lawyers and civil lawyers reason and argue in the same way?

The fields of tort and crime have much in common in practice, particularly in how they both try to respond to wrongs and regulate future behaviour. Despite this commonality in fact, fascinating difficulties have hitherto not been resolved about how legal systems co-ordinate (or leave wild) the border between tort and crime. What is the purpose of tort law and criminal law, and how do you tell the difference between them? Do criminal lawyers and civil lawyers reason and argue in the same way?