You may have to Search all our reviewed books and magazines, click the sign up button below to create a free account.
In the past few decades, scholars have offered positive, normative, and most recently, interpretive theories of contract law. This title confronts the leading interpretive theories of contract and demonstrates their interpretive doctrinal failures.
Arbitration Law in America: A Critical Assessment is a source of arguments and practical suggestions for changing the American arbitration process. The book argues that the Federal Arbitration Act badly needs major changes. The authors, who have previously written major articles on arbitration law and policy, here set out their own views and argue among themselves about the necessary reforms of arbitration. The book contains draft legislation for use in international and domestic arbitration and a detailed explanation of the precise justifications for proposed legislative changes. It also contains two proposals that might be deemed radical - to ban arbitration related to the purchase of products by consumers and to prohibit arbitration of employment disputes. Each proposal is vetted fully and critiqued by one or more of the other co-authors.
For some Western European legal systems the principle of good faith has proved central to the development of their law of contracts, while in others it has been marginalized or even rejected. This book starts by surveying the use or neglect of good faith in these legal systems and explaining its historical origins. The central part of the book takes thirty situations which would, in some legal systems, attract the application of good faith, analyses them according to fifteen national legal systems and assesses the practical significance of both the principle of good faith and its relationship to other contractual and non-contractual doctrines and forms of regulation in each situation. The book concludes by explaining how European lawyers, whether from a civil or common law background, may need to come to terms with the principle of good faith. This was the first completed project of The Common Core of European Private Law launched at the University of Trento.
Government frequently responds to crises (like 9/11 and Hurricane Katrina) with laws that have retrospective effects on existing contracts. Because these laws are usually constitutional, the promisee has no claim against the government. The promisor, however, will probably obtain an excuse from the contract because performance is now either illegal or impaired by government acts or orders. The promisor is in what can be called "the Zone of Coercion." If excuse is granted, the contract is discharged but the promisee, because of limited remedies, will not be restored to its pre-contract position. Thus, the promisee's contract rights are casualties in what amounts to a constitutional taking by ...
None
None
Unlike most other books in the field, which slant toward either policyholder or insurer counsel, Stempel and Knutsen on Insurance Coverage takes an even-handed nonexcess and umbrella aking it useful to attorneys from all sides. Moreover, it's designed for practitioners from all professional backgrounds and insurance experience. Written in clear, jargon-free language, it covers everything from the basic insurance concepts, principles, and structure of insurance policies to today's most complex issues and disputes. The authors, Jeffrey W. Stempel and Erik S. Knutsen, are well-known authorities on the law of insurance coverage, and this new Fourth Edition of Stempel and Knutsen on Insurance Cov...