Abstract:
This working paper considers the legal system of England and Wales in terms of its impact on other legal systems and its reception of transplants from other legal systems. The paper was written to comply with a template established by the coordinator of a global representation of legal systems for the meeting of the Academy of International and Comparative Law held in Washington in 2010. As such it provides a very broad overview which provides an introduction to some aspects of the Common Law system of England and Wales.
Farran, Susan Elizabeth, Legal Culture and Legal Transplants (December 14, 2009).
Purpose
Saturday, November 24, 2012
Friday, November 23, 2012
Comparative Law as Rhetoric: An Analysis of the Use of Comparative Law in International Arbitration
Abstract:
This article addresses the use of comparative law in arbitral advocacy.
Sourgens, Frederic G., Comparative Law as Rhetoric: An Analysis of the Use of Comparative Law in International Arbitration (2007). Pepperdine Dispute Resolution Law Journal, Vol. 8, No. 1, 2007.
This article addresses the use of comparative law in arbitral advocacy.
Sourgens, Frederic G., Comparative Law as Rhetoric: An Analysis of the Use of Comparative Law in International Arbitration (2007). Pepperdine Dispute Resolution Law Journal, Vol. 8, No. 1, 2007.
Friday, November 16, 2012
Toward a Mature Doctrine of Informed Consent: Lessons from a Comparative Law Analysis
Abstract:
Under the doctrine of informed consent, physicians owe patients a duty to disclose to them all material risks of a contemplated treatment or procedure. While the doctrine is generally well accepted in the United States and several other common law countries, it has had a rockier reception in other places. This inconsistency is on its face surprising, given that the doctrine stems from the principle of patient autonomy – a principle to which most countries supposedly subscribe. Unless the patient is in possession of sufficient information, that autonomy may be compromised. But the inconsistency is less puzzling when one considers the difficulty of applying the doctrine to the actual physician-patient relationship.
This article examines the doctrine in four countries that have had different responses to informed consent: the United States; Great Britain; Canada; and Taiwan. This comparison highlights the compromises that each of these jurisdictions has made to the foundational principles of informed consent, and then proposes a way forward by borrowing heavily from the Canadian model.
Culhane, John G., Wu, King-Jean, Faparusi, Oluyomi and Juray, Eric J., Toward a Mature Doctrine of Informed Consent: Lessons from a Comparative Law Analysis (November 14, 2012). British Journal of American Legal Studies, Vol. 1, p. 551 (2012); Widener Law School Legal Studies Research Paper No. 12-37.
Under the doctrine of informed consent, physicians owe patients a duty to disclose to them all material risks of a contemplated treatment or procedure. While the doctrine is generally well accepted in the United States and several other common law countries, it has had a rockier reception in other places. This inconsistency is on its face surprising, given that the doctrine stems from the principle of patient autonomy – a principle to which most countries supposedly subscribe. Unless the patient is in possession of sufficient information, that autonomy may be compromised. But the inconsistency is less puzzling when one considers the difficulty of applying the doctrine to the actual physician-patient relationship.
This article examines the doctrine in four countries that have had different responses to informed consent: the United States; Great Britain; Canada; and Taiwan. This comparison highlights the compromises that each of these jurisdictions has made to the foundational principles of informed consent, and then proposes a way forward by borrowing heavily from the Canadian model.
Culhane, John G., Wu, King-Jean, Faparusi, Oluyomi and Juray, Eric J., Toward a Mature Doctrine of Informed Consent: Lessons from a Comparative Law Analysis (November 14, 2012). British Journal of American Legal Studies, Vol. 1, p. 551 (2012); Widener Law School Legal Studies Research Paper No. 12-37.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)