Welcome to the law/lore School

Law is saturate with stories. People tell their stories to lawyers; lawyers tell their clients' stories to courts; politicians develop policies to respond to their constituents' stories of injustice or inequality. These stories then translate into sources of law. Cases resolve contested stories between parties. Statutes target larger stories of social, economical and political significance. The legal system, in short, is a synthesis of statutory and judicial solutions to stories.

Let’s talk about lex: Narrative analysis as both research method and teaching technique in law

Law is narration: it is narrative, narrator and the narrated. As a narrative, the law is constituted by a constellation of texts – from official sources such as statutes, treaties and cases, to private arrangements such as commercial contracts, deeds and parenting plans. All are a collection of stories: cases are narrative contests of facts and rights; statutes are recitations of the substantive and procedural bases for social, economic and political interactions; private agreements are plots for future relationships, whether personal or professional. As a narrator, law speaks in the language of modern liberalism. It describes its world in abstractions rather than in concrete experience, universal principles rather than individual subjectivity. It casts people into ‘parties’ to legal relationships; structures human interactions into ‘issues’ or ‘problems’; and tells individual stories within larger narrative arcs such as ‘the rule of law’ and ‘the interests of justice’. As the narrated, the law is a character in its own story. The scholarship of law, for example, is a type of story-telling with law as its central character. For positivists, still the dominant group in the legal genre, law is a closed system of formal rules with an “immanent rationality” and its own “structure, substantive content, procedure and tradition,” dedicated to finality of judgment. For scholars inspired by the interpretative tradition in the humanities, law is a more ambivalent character, susceptible to influences from outside its realm and masking a hidden ideological agenda under its cloak of universality and neutrality. For social scientists, law is a protagonist on a wider social stage, impacting on society, the economy and the polity is often surprising ways.

The architecture of the psychiatric milieu

The last time a peer-reviewed volume on the future of mental health facilities was produced was in 1959, following a symposium organised by the American Psychological Association. The consensus was easy enough to follow and still resonates today: the best spaces to treat psychiatric illness will be in smaller, less restrictive units that offer more privacy and allow greater personalisation of space – possibly a converted hotel (Goshen, 1959). In some way, all those ideals have come to pass. An ideal typology was never established, but even so, units have shrunk from thousands of beds to units that typically house no more than 50 patients. Patients are generally more independent and are free to wander (within a unit) as they please. But the trend toward smaller and freer is reversing. This change is not driven by a desire to find the ideal building nor better models of care, but by growing concerns about budgets, self-harm and psychiatric violence. This issue of the Facilities comes at a time when the healthcare design is increasingly dominated by codes, statutes and guidelines. But the articles herein are a call to stop and think. We are not at the point where guidelines can be helpful, because they do not embody any depth of knowledge nor wisdom. These articles are intended to inject some new research on psychiatric/environmental interactions and also to remind planners and managers that guidelines might not tackle a core misunderstanding: fear-management about patient safety and the safety of society is not the purpose of the psychiatric facility. It is purpose is to create spaces that are suitable for improving the well-being of the mentally ill.

Statutory licences and third party dealings: Property analysis v statutory interpretation

Statutory licensing schemes are proliferating as a means of regulating commercial activity, resource exploitation and activities harmful to the environment. Statutes often declare that entitlements are non-transferable or are transferable only with approval or subject to conditions. Some entitlements, such as resource consents issued under the Resource Management Act 1991 (NZ), are declared not to be property. Despite these statutory declarations, entitlements are often held to be transferable in equity or to be property for the purposes of resolving private disputes. Recently, in Greenshell New Zealand Ltd v Tikapa Moana Enterprises Ltd, the High Court of New Zealand indicated that a resource consent was property that could support a claim for relief against forfeiture, continuing the trend in earlier cases that appear to depart from the statute. In this article we examine the juridical treatment of entitlements in private law. We identify factors influencing the courts’ enforcement of private arrangements which may circumvent the statutory intent. Our analysis will guide legislators in the design of provisions to implement new schemes.

Accountability for good faith in commercial dealing: The Carter v Boehm legacy 250 years on

In common law jurisdictions such as England, Australia, Canada and New Zealand good faith in contracting has long been recognised in specific areas of the law such as insurance law and franchising, and more recently the implied duties of good faith and mutual trust and convenience in employment contracts have generated a considerable volume of case law. Outside of these areas of law that may be characterised as being strongly‘relational’ in character,the courts in common law jurisdictions have been reluctant to embrace a more universal application of good faith in contracting and performance. However increasingly there are cases which support the proposition that there is a common law duty of good faith of general application to all commercial contracts. Most important in this context is the recent decision of the Supreme Court of Canada in Bhasin v Hrynew.1 However, this matter is by no means resolved in all common law jurisdictions. This article looks at the recent case law and literature and at various legislative incursions including statutes, codes of conduct and regulations impacting good faith in commercial dealings.