_____________________________________________________________________________________

*Winfield & Jolowicz, (15th ed. 1998), Ch. 2; Markesinis & Deakin, (4^th ed. 1999) pp. 36-44

Atiyah, Accidents, Compensation and the Law (6th ed, Cane), Ch. 7

J. Fleming, The Law of Torts (9th ed), Ch. 1, *Ch. 15

(Advanced) Zweigert & Kotz, An Introduction to Comparative Law (3rd ed., trans. Tony Weir), Ch. 42

Winfield & Jolowicz, Ch. 10 or Markesinis & Deakin, pp. 558-600 (*M & D includes more on U.S.)

Pearson Report, Vol.1., Ch. 22

EC Directive (85/374/EEC) (Easily accessible in books of tort statutes or in appendix to Stapleton)

**Consumer Protection Act 1987, Part 1 and ss. 45 & 46 (Easily accessible as above)

*European Commission v U.K. [1997] All E.R. (E.C.) 481

Richardson v LRC Products [2000] PIQR P164

Abouzaid v Mothercare, The Times, 20 Feb 2001, CA

*Stapleton, Products Liability (1994, Butterworths), (at least) Ch. 10 & 323-340

(and read more if you’re interested) NB written before the European Commission v U.K. case.

Stapleton, 6 OxJLS 392

Newdick, 47 CLJ 455; 103 LQR 288

Review after completing next week’s work - think particularly about the standard of liability.

Consider, Nettleship v Weston [1971] 2 QB 691 and Mansfield v Weetabix [1998] 1 WLR 1263

Res Ipsa Loquitur: Winfield & Jolowicz (15th ed. 1998), pp. 187-193

J v North Lincolnshire CC [2000] PIQR P84

(Headnotes) Merlin v BNF [1990] 3 All ER 711; Blue Circle Industries v M.O.D. [1999] 2 WLR 295

Please note that certain strict torts are 'off the syllabus' eg Animals Act 1971

**Winfield & Jolowicz, (15th ed. 1998), pp. 20-46; Markesinis & Deakin (4^th), 44-55.

*J. Fleming, The Law of Torts (9th ed), Ch 20

Vaccine Damage Payments Act 1979

(Comparative approach for those interested) Fleming, 30 Am J Comp L 297

Pearson Report, Vol.1., Chs. 21, 24, 25, 30, 31

*Atiyah, Accidents, Compensation and the Law (6th ed, Cane), Ch 19

*Atiyah, The Damages Lottery, Ch. 8 (read more if you want to)

*Winfield & Jolowicz, (15th ed. 1998), pp. 41-43; J. Fleming, The Law of Torts (9th ed), pp. 449-453

* Tort and Insurance

Stapleton, "Tort, Insurance, Ideology" (1995) 58 MLR 820

Atiyah, Accidents, Compensation and the Law (6th ed, Cane), Chs 9 & 11

M. Clarke, Policies and Perceptions of Insurance: An Introduction to Insurance Law, Ch. 8

1998. "There is so little justification for strict liability in the law of torts that its apparent scarcity is hardly surprising." Discuss.

1995. "It cannot be denied that the Pearson package of proposals is better than the current position, and that implementation of the Commission’s proposals would be much better than no reform at all: but that comparison should not inhibit criticism of the limited nature of the reforms suggested" (Harris). Discuss.

1994. To what extent does Part I of the Consumer Protection Act 1987 improve the rights of those injured by defective products? Are there dangers in having a special rule governing such injuries?

1993. Critically evaluate the arguments for no-fault regimes for the compensation of personal injuries including those with comprehensive coverage and those limited to road or medical accidents.

1993. To what extent is the law of negligence explained or justified by notions of insurance?

1992. "The impact of insurance on the tort system is to ensure it operates systematically to the disadvantage of the poor. This is the best of many arguments in favour of its replacement by a New Zealand-type scheme for personal injuries." Discuss.

1991 "An innovation as obscure in its precise effects as it is undesirable in its objective." Consider this comment on Part I of the Consumer Protection Act 1987.

1990 Is Part I of the Consumer Protection Act 1987 a satisfactory solution to the problems of product liability?

1987 What, if any, is the relationship between negligence in the legal sense (including contributory negligence) and moral wrongdoing?

What is strict liability? When does the law of tort impose strict liability? Is the law satisfactory in this respect?

Read all the material from one of the textbooks and the starred material on Product Liability without fail. (Do read the statute! I will spend at least a quarter of the tutorial checking that you know what the principal provisions of it are.)

As far as the rest goes, strict liability, alternative compensation schemes, and insurance are all popular essay topics for examiners. (Indeed on some papers there is an essay on each!). Students tend to like answering them because they don’t have to remember cases. But (of course) the lack of cases doesn’t mean that you get marks for being superficial (!!) and the detail you’ll need for a convincing analysis can most easily be found by looking at some of the monograph chapters/articles/advanced texts.