Our articles

Causation in English law: A matter of law, of fact or morals (a way of allocating blame)?

Causation is understood in criminal law as a chain of events linked to each other - it is a link between the defendant’s act and the consequence which occurred as a result of that act. As causation represents an integral element of result crimes - the one to be proved, the law developed certain tests to establish it. They represent a two-stage process or two tests to be applied in succession. The first test is factual causation and the second one is legal causation.

Thus, it is seen from the outset that causation is effectively a mixture being a question of fact and a question of law at the same time or, in other words, causation is a factual issue to begin the analysis and a legal one to finalise the findings. At the same time, it is arguable that legal causation itself is a facade of a chosen approach to allocating blame. Indeed, it is submitted that criminal law itself is a mechanism for allocating blame. In turn, allocation of blame is a process which is almost inevitably based on moral and policy considerations.

Phenomenon of ‘competence creep’: who is the "villain" and what is the remedy?
 

The ECJ often interprets Articles 308 and 95 EC very broadly. This is why its judicial activism has been named as the major contributing factor to the emergence of the phenomenon of ‘competence creep’. Still it is argued that "the greatest expansion of Community competence has been through successive treaty revision. It has been the Member States themselves that have been willing to accord new competences to the EC”. (Craig & de Burca, 2008).  The present article seeks to assess the extent to which this statement is correct in relation to the phenomenon of ‘competence creep’.

Consideration in contract law, its changing nature and the need of reform

The doctrine of consideration is a traditional notion which has existed in English and common law for centuries. Effectively, it represents one of the main pillars on which the Law of Contract is based. At the same time it is evident that the requirement of consideration has come under constant and strong criticism. Thus, accepting as a postulate that any significantchanges in law should only be initiated when there is a strong case for them we need to investigate the reasons for that criticism and assess whether it is substantiated enough to call for the review.