Dimensions of Private Law: Categories and Concepts in Anglo-American Legal Reasoning

273 Pages·2003·1.22 MB·English

by  Stephen Waddams

This page intentionally left blank
DIMENSIONS OF PRIVATE LAW
CategoriesandConceptsinAnglo-AmericanLegalReasoning
Anglo-Americanprivatelaw(thelawgoverningmutualrightsandobli-
gationsofindividuals)hasbeenafarmorecomplexphenomenonthanis
usuallyrecognized.Attemptstoreduceittoasingleexplanatoryprinciple,
ortoapreciselyclassifiedorcategorizedmap,scheme,ordiagramarelikely
todistortthepastbyomittingormarginalizingmaterialinconsistentwith
proposedprinciplesorschemes.Manylegalissuescannotbeallocatedex-
clusivelytoonecategory.Oftenseveralconceptshaveworkedconcurrently
andcumulatively,sothatcompetingexplanationsandcategoriesarenot
somuchalternatives,ofwhichonlyonecanbecorrect,asdifferentdimen-
sionsofacomplexphenomenon,ofwhichseveralmaybesimultaneously
validandnecessary.Thisstudywillbeofimportancetothoseinterestedin
property,tort,contract,unjustenrichment,legalreasoning,legalmethod,
thehistoryofthecommonlaw,andtherelationbetweenlegaltheoryand
legalhistory.
Stephen Waddams is Goodman/Schipper Professor of Law at the
UniversityofToronto.HismanypublicationsincludeProductsLiability,
Sexual Slander in Nineteenth-Century England: Defamation in the Eccle-
siasticalCourts,1815–1855,TheLawofContracts,TheLawofDamages,
Introduction to the Study of Law, and Law, Politics and the Church of
England:theCareerofStephenLushington1782–1873.

DIMENSIONS
OF PRIVATE LAW
Categories and Concepts
in Anglo-American
Legal Reasoning
STEPHEN WADDAMS
  
Cambridge, New York, Melbourne, Madrid, Cape Town, Singapore, São Paulo
Cambridge University Press
The Edinburgh Building, Cambridge  , United Kingdom
Published in the United States of America by Cambridge University Press, New York
www.cambridge.org
Information on this title: www.cambridge.org/9780521816434
© Cambridge University Press 2003
This book is in copyright. Subject to statutory exception and to the provision of
relevant collective licensing agreements, no reproduction of any part may take place
without the written permission of Cambridge University Press.
First published in print format 2003
- 
isbn-13 978-0-511-07365-6 eBook (EBL)
- 
isbn-10 0-511-07365-8 eBook (EBL)
- 
isbn-13 978-0-521-81643-4 hardback
- 
isbn-10 0-521-81643-2 hardback
isbn--13 978-0-521-01669-8 paperback
- 
isbn-10 0-521-01669-X paperback
Cambridge University Press has no responsibility for the persistence or accuracy of
s for external or third-party internet websites referred to in this book, and does not
guarantee that any content on such websites is, or will remain, accurate or appropriate.
CONTENTS
Preface pagevi
Tableofcases viii
1 Introduction:themappingoflegalconcepts 1
2 JohannaWagnerandtherivaloperahouses 23
3 Liabilityforeconomicharms 40
4 Reliance 57
5 Liabilityforphysicalharms 80
6 Profitsderivedfromwrongs 107
7 Domesticobligations 127
8 Interrelationofobligations 142
9 Propertyandobligation 172
10 Publicinterestandprivateright 191
11 Conclusion:theconceptoflegalmapping 222
Workscited 234
Index 240
v
PREFACE
OrganizationofideasinAnglo-Americanprivatelawhasbeenbesetwith
difficulties–linguistic,philosophical,jurisprudential,rhetorical,andhis-
torical. This study, though not a history of private law (by period or by
topic),ishistoricalinperspective:attentionisdirectedtothepast(fromthe
eighteenthcenturytotherecentpast),andtothefailureofanyorganiza-
tionalschemeorofanysingleorsimpleexplanationeithertodescribethe
lawthatprecededit,ortosupplyaworkableguidefordecisionsthereafter.
Thisfailuresuggeststhattheinterrelationoflegalconceptshasinvolveda
greatercomplexitythancanbecapturedbyorganizationalschemes,maps,
ordiagrams,orbyanysingleexplanatoryprinciple.
Sincethenineteenthcenturyithasbeencommontomakedistinctions
in respect of Anglo-American law between public and private law, and
within private law between property and obligations, and within obliga-
tionsamongcontracts,torts,andunjustenrichment.Legalissuesandrules
havebeensupposedtobelongtooneofthesesubcategories,andtherules
applied to determine the result in particular cases. But this scheme has
failedtoaccountformanyactualjudicialdecisions,afailurethatled,inthe
twentiethcentury,toscepticismofformalexplanationsoflaw,toalternative
explanations,andinturntocounter-reaction.
This study approaches these questions not by proposing any new all-
embracingexplanation,orbyseekingtoimposeasinglepatternonallof
private law, but by proceeding from the particular towards the general.
From this direction it will be seen that many important legal issues have
not been resolved by being initially allocated exclusively to a particular
subcategory,butbysimultaneousapplicationofseveraloralloftheconcepts
mentionedinthelastparagraph.Theplanofthestudyisnotschematicbut
progressive, considering first a particular dispute – that between the two
principaloperahousesinmid-nineteenth-centuryLondonfortheservices
ofJohannaWagner–andthenproceedingtoanumberofotherlegalissues
vi
preface vii
that have similarly resisted classification. In the light of these issues we
turn to the interrelation of obligations, then to the distinction between
obligations and property, and finally to that between private right and
publicpolicy.Thisprogressionfromparticulartogeneral,likethemethod
oflegalthinkingitdescribes,showswhyithasbeensodifficulttoreverse
theprocessandtoimposethegeneralupontheparticular.
IamgratefultotheUniversityofTorontoforresearchleave,totheKillam
ProgramattheCanadaCouncilfortheArts,andtotheSocialSciencesand
HumanitiesResearchCouncilofCanadaforresearchfunds.Iamgrateful
alsotomanyfriends,colleagues,andstudentswhoreadthedraftsandmade
helpfulcomments,andtoStephanieChong,AdamTaylor,CraigLockwood,
MeganFerrier,andJohnSawickiforvaluableresearchassistance.
StephenWaddams
Toronto,2002
TABLE OF CASES
Addisv.GramophoneCo.Ltd[1909]AC488,HL 153
ADGASystemsInt.Ltdv.VelcomLtd(1999)168DLR(4th)351,
Ont.CA 155
TheAfrica(1854)1Sp299 217
TheAlbazero[1977]AC774,HL 45
Albert(Prince)v.Strange(1849)2DeG&Sm652,1H&Tw9 75
TheAlbion(1861)Lush282 216
AlfredMcAlpineConstructionLtdv.PanatownLtd[2001]1
AC518,HL 2,44,46
Allenv.Flood[1898]AC1,HL 40
Allenv.GulfOilRefining,Ltd[1980]QB156,CA 94
AmalgamatedInvestment&PropertyCo.v.TexasCommerceInternational
Bank[1982]QB84 65
TheAnnapolis(1861)Lush355 216
Annsv.MertonLondonBoroughCouncil[1978]AC728,HL 47,157,
203
Anon(1857)Deane295 194
TheAraminta,(1854)1SpAd&Ecc224,Adm.Ct 151–2
Argyllv.Argyll[1967]1Ch302 77
AsameraOilCorp.Ltdv.SeaOil&GeneralCorp.[1979]SCR633 114
Astleyv.Reynolds(1731)2Str915 166
AtticaSeaCarriersCorpv.FerrostaalPoseidonBulkReedereiGmbH[1976]
1Lloyd’sRep250,CA 115,148
AttorneyGeneralforHongKongv.Reid[1994]1AC324,PC 183
AttorneyGeneralv.Blake[2001]1AC268,HL 2,35
AttorneyGeneralv.DeKeyser’sRoyalHotel[1920]AC508,HL 84
AttorneyGeneralv.GuardianNewspapers(No.2)[1990]1AC109,
HL 124
viii