Volume 1, Issue 3

This article considers the application of the duty to mitigate in claims for damages in respect of child-rearing costs consequent on an unplanned pregnancy, and investigates in particular how decisions whether or not to have an abortion or alternatively to give up the child, when born, for adoption may impact upon compensation awards.

This article addresses the liability that private certification bodies may incur to third parties for pure economic loss in cases of negligent certification, and uses it as a case study to illustrate the ways in which English and Italian law deal with liability for negligent misrepresentation in general. The analysis identifies points of convergence and difference between the two systems, and compares tortious and ‘hybrid’ approaches, highlighting operational problems that may arise (eg indeterminate liability) and broader implications for theoretical accounts of tort law and the law of obligations. The notion of certification is construed in a broad sense to encompass all statements certifying that a product or process complies with specified standards.

Since 2007 the Spanish Supreme Court has quoted the Principles of European Tort Law (PETL) several times in its decisions. Lower Courts have followed suit, quoting the PETL in at least 25 decisions, sometimes following previous decisions of the Supreme Court, sometimes independently. The paper analyses which provisions have been quoted by the Spanish Supreme Court and lower courts and what consequences have emerged

The new Tort Liability Law of the People's Republic of China was finally adopted at the 12th Session of the Standing Committee of the 11th Chinese National People's Congress (NPC) on 26 December 2009 and came into effect on 1 July 2010. Thus a further great step in drafting a new Civil Code has been taken, after the enactment of the Contract Law in 1999 and the Law of Real Rights in 2007. In drafting the new Tort Law, the Chinese lawmakers have taken considerable account of foreign legal systems, but nevertheless it is a Chinese codification with many specific features which are of great interest for European lawyers. In the following the authors provide an overview of the most important provisions. As there exist no published legislative preparatory materials, no explanatory notes and no scholarly commentaries on the new Law, the authors had to overcome considerable difficulties in interpreting the new Law; the outcome is, of course, only a first and unavoidably subjective opinion.