Tort Law – Reading Lists

 

 

 

 

 

 

PLEASE NOTE:

The reading-lists published on this website are NOT the official Oxford University Law Faculty reading lists for tort law.

Roderick Bagshaw ASSUMES NO RESPONSIBILITY for any losses, harm or damage caused by relying on these reading lists for any purpose whatsoever.

These reading lists will be updated from time to time - BUT - at any time may be UP TO A YEAR OLD and some lists may be older than others.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Tort Law – Introduction MICHAELMAS Term 2002

 

 

 

 

 

 

Tort is one of the compulsory subjects within the Final Honour School syllabus and an option on the Magister Juris course. The law of tort is principally concerned with providing compensation for personal injury and damage to property. However, other interests may also be protected, such as reputation, personal freedom, title to property, enjoyment of property, financial and commercial interests. The wide range of protected interests means that your syllabus does not cover the whole of the law of tort. Instead we will concentrate on particular areas which raise interesting and difficult issues of principle, policy and practice. When it comes to sitting your exams, you may also have to draw on your knowledge of contract law when answering the tort paper.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Teaching Convention.

Teaching is based on the following assumptions:

1. Questions will not be set on the following subjects: torts to goods (other than negligence), false imprisonment, malicious prosecution, insanity as a defence, liability for animals.

2. Candidates will not be required to have detailed knowledge of the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act 1974 or the statutory provisions in force at any time giving immunity from suit to persons acting in contemplation or furtherance of a trade dispute.

3. Questions may be set on the following topics:

(a) The form and quantum of compensation in actions for personal injuries and death.

(b) The relationship between insurance (first and third party) and the law of tort.

(c) The cost of providing compensation for personal injuries and death through the law of tort; the ways in which the costs are distributed.

(d) Criticisms of, and proposals for reform of, the law of tort insofar as it operates as a system of compensation for personal injury and death.

4. Questions may be set on product liability, including the provisions of the Directive on Liability for Defective Products (85/374/EEC), but detailed knowledge of the principles of European Community Law or the jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice will not be required.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Plan for Tutorials.

The Teaching Convention does not tell you much about what the course actually covers. My intention is to teach 8 tutorials covering the following subjects - the reading-lists are linked:

1. Negligence 1: Fault

2. Negligence 2: Duty of Care (General)

3. Negligence 3: Causation and Remoteness

4. Negligence 4: Duties of Care (Occupiers, Builders & Employers)

5. Negligence 5: Duties of Care (Pure Economic Loss)

6. Alternatives to Negligence (incl. Product Liability, Insurance and Compensation Schemes)

7. Nuisance and Rylands v. Fletcher

8. Economic Torts

 

I recommend that you also cover Vicarious Liability and Assessment of Damages. I will provide you with reading lists, but the best way to cover these topics is to attend lectures.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Structure of Reading-Lists.

The reading-lists for this subject tend to be long. I hope that they can be completed with four days of work (3 days of reading – 1 to think and write). The Faculty thinks you should do 45 hours of academic work each week (split between 1.5 subjects … so 30 hours per tutorial). If you put less hours in then – obviously – you will never get near to completing these lists. Needless to say, it is important that you plan your workload sensibly. On each reading-list I have tried to indicate ten or so crucial cases with an asterisk. They are often long cases, but they are always important, and you must read them (at the very least in a casebook … headnotes are wholly unacceptable for starred cases).

 

 

Written work - Each week I will expect you to hand in or present a piece of written work at the tutorial. There will (probably) be 5 weeks when you have to write and essay and 3 when you have to answer a problem.

 

 

Books -            Textbooks. Each week I try to remember to give references to McBride & Bagshaw (1st ed. 2001, Longman), Winfield & Jolowicz (16th ed. 2002) and Markesinis & Deakin (4th ed. 1999). It is up to you which of them you want to use as your textbook (almost certainly a waste of time to try to read more than one of them!). My experience has been that most students find Winfield & Jolowicz easier to understand than Markesinis & Deakin, but that some prefer the wider variety of critical perspectives and comparative insights offered by Markesinis & Deakin. Blackwells should have some secondhand copies of both of these books. McBride & Bagshaw is a new textbook (August 2001) that I think has a lot going for it. It was designed to be 20% shorter than the main alternatives, and to be a straightforward and blunt book, which cuts through much of the obfuscating jargon that has traditionally confused students. It has the benefit of being linked to a website (www.booksites.net/mcbride) which provides quarterly updates discussing new cases and statutes. (The first three sets of updates have already been posted (September 2002) so it already discusses cases not mentioned in the 2002 editions of other books! [PS I have a small financial interest in this book!]

 

 

     Casebooks. The three leading casebooks are Weir (9th ed. 2000), Hepple & Matthews (5th ed. 2001) and Lunney & Oliphant (1st ed. 2000). Hepple & Matthews and Lunney & Oliphant have more cases in them than Weir, but Weir has more provocative commentary. Lunney & Oliphant tries to combine textbook and casebook, but doesn't cover the topic for tutorial 8 at all. If you want to use a casebook you can choose. Work out whether you want it principally to help you get through the cases or you want it to help you to generate ideas, and perhaps see what you can get good value on secondhand…

 

 

     Statutes. A book of statutes will save you time and photocopying costs. It will also make it easier for us to discuss interpretation of particular provisions in tutorials. Blackstone’s do a statute selection which covers tort and contract (and restitution), which is a very worthwhile investment. (And is also likely to be the book of statutes that you are provided with in your final exams).

 

 

     Swot-style books. Personally I think you should be alarmed if you regularly feel that your week’s work could be improved by reading a Swot-style book! But if you find yourself needing a quick-fix in some weeks then there are short books by Rogers and McKendrick which are perfectly respectable. There is also a short book by Hedley (3rd ed. 2002) which I have heard recommended by one faculty member and doubted by another! (It looks fine to me).

 

 

     Others. Several weeks’ lists refer to Cane, Atiyah’s Accidents, Compensation & the Law (6th ed. 1999). It is a classic.

If you hate all three of the recommended textbooks, then the books by Howarth and by M. Jones are both used widely. Howarth tends to adopt 'firm' positions on some contentious questions but otherwise is an excellent book (but a new edition is imminent). M. Jones is a very clear and useful textbook, but sometimes a bit over-compressed on complex issues. A new edition of M. Jones was published in 2002.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Pre-course reading

I think that it would be worth either

reading McBride & Bagshaw, chs. 1-3 (less than 30 pages in total!) then starting on Week 1’s list

or reading Markesinis & Deakin, chs. 1-8 (less than 70 pages in total!) then starting on Week 1’s list

or reading Winfield & Jolowicz, chs. 1-3 (less than 60 pages in total!) then …

 

 

 

 

 

 

Feedback: roderick.bagshaw@law.ox.ac.uk