A rate and state friction law for saline ice

Sea ice friction models are necessary to predict the nature of interactions between sea ice floes. These interactions are of interest on a range of scales, for example, to predict loads on engineering structures in icy waters or to understand the basin-scale motion of sea ice. Many models use Amonton's friction law due to its simplicity. More advanced models allow for hydrodynamic lubrication and refreezing of asperities; however, modeling these processes leads to greatly increased complexity. In this paper we propose, by analogy with rock physics, that a rate- and state-dependent friction law allows us to incorporate memory (and thus the effects of lubrication and bonding) into ice friction models without a great increase in complexity. We support this proposal with experimental data on both the laboratory (∼0.1 m) and ice tank (∼1 m) scale. These experiments show that the effects of static contact under normal load can be incorporated into a friction model. We find the parameters for a first-order rate and state model to be A = 0.310, B = 0.382, and μ0 = 0.872. Such a model then allows us to make predictions about the nature of memory effects in moving ice-ice contacts.

English Contract Law and the Great War: the development of a doctrine of frustration

This article examines changes that occurred in English contract law as a result of the demands made upon Great Britain by the Great War. The focus is on the development of the doctrine of frustration in English law. In particular, it is argued that the development of the doctrine of frustration was fashioned from internal legal forces in the form of both existing case law and emergency legislation in response to the demands placed upon the nation by a global war. The way in which the doctrine of frustration developed during the Great War arose as a direct result of the way in which Britain chose to meet the logistical demands created by the way it fought the Great War.

Construction contracts: law and management (3rd edition)

This book is aimed primarily at students for whom the study of building or civil engineering contracts forms part of a construction-based course. We have had in mind the syllabus requirements for first degrees in Building, Civil Engineering, Architecture, Quantity Surveying and Building Surveying, as well as those of postgraduate courses in Construction Management and Project Management. We have also assumed that such students will already have been introduced to the general principles of English law, especially those relating to contract and tort. As a result, while aspects of those subjects that are of particular relevance to construction are dealt with here, the reader must look elsewhere for the general legal background. In producing this third edition, we have again been greatly assisted by the many helpful comments made by reviewers and users of its predecessor. Nonetheless, our basic aim is identical to that which underpinned the first edition: to provide an explanation of the fundamental principles of construction contract law, rather than a clause-by-clause analysis of any particular standard-form contract. As a result, while we draw most frequently upon JCT 98 for our illustrations of particular points, this merely reflects the pre-eminent position occupied by that particular form of contract in the UK construction industry. We conclude by repeating our previous warning as to the dangers inherent in a little learning. Neither this book, nor the courses for which it is intended, seek to produce construction lawyers. The objective is rather to enable those who are not lawyers to resolve simple construction disputes before they become litigious, and to recognize when matters require professional legal advice. It should be the aim of every construction student to understand the legal framework sufficiently that they can instruct and brief specialist lawyers, and this book is designed to help them towards that understanding.

Construction contracts: law and management. 4th edition

This is a fully revised edition of the UK’s leading textbook on the law governing construction contracts and the management and administration of those contracts. Although the legal principles involved are an aspect of general contract law, the practical and commercial complexities of the construction industry have increasingly made this a specialist area. This new edition has been brought up to date with recent cases and developments in the law as it stands at March 2007. The basic approach of the book has been retained. Rather than provide a commentary on standard-form contracts, our approach is to introduce the general principles that underlie contracts in construction, illustrating them by reference to the most important standard forms currently in use. Some of the common standard-form contracts have been revised since the previous edition, and the text has been revised to take account of these changes. Practitioners (consultants, builders, clients and lawyers) will find this an extremely useful source of reference, providing in-depth explanations for all of the features found in contemporary construction contracts, with reasons. A unique feature of this book is the way that it brings together the relevant principles of law with the practical issues arising in construction cases. It is a key text for construction undergraduates and postgraduates as well as for those taking the RIBA Part III and CIOB Part II examinations.

The trial: how procedure shapes substance

The rules and the principles of the common law are formed from the cases decided in courts of common law. The unique nature of the evolution of the common law has long been the subject of study. Less frequently studied has been the impact of procedure upon the development of substantive law. This paper examines how the procedures applicable to the trial of a case can affect the substance of the resulting decision. The focus of the examination is the decision in Bell v Lever Bros [1932] AC 161. While the case has long been regarded as a leading, albeit confusing, contract law case it is also greatly concerned with the conduct of litigation. This paper argues that the substantive decision was largely determined by the civil procedure available. Different rules of civil procedure, it is suggested, would have resulted in a better decision in the English law of contract.

Taylor v Caldwell (1863)

A Landmark Case is one which stands out from other less remarkable cases. Landmark status is generally accorded because the case marks the beginning or the end of a course of legal development. Taylor v Caldwell is regarded as a landmark case because it marks the beginning of a legal development: the introduction of the doctrine of frustration into English contract law. This chapter explores the legal and historical background to the case to ascertain if it is a genuine landmark. A closer scrutiny reveals that while the legal significance of the case is exaggerated, the historical significance of the cases reveals an unknown irony: the case is a suitable landmark to the frustration of human endeavours. While the existence of the Surrey Music Hall was brief, it brought insanity, imprisonment, bankruptcy and death to its creators.

Understanding unconscionability in proprietary estoppel

In a series of recent cases, courts have reasserted unconscionability as the basis of proprietary estoppel and in doing so have moved away from the structured form of discretion envisaged in the classic Taylors Fashions formula. In light of these developments, this paper traces the use of unconscionability in estoppel and examines the changing role attributed to the concept. In a parallel development, in exercising their remedial discretion once a claim to estoppel has been established, the courts have emphasised the foundation of estoppel in unconscionability to assert the need for proportionality between the detriment and remedy as ‘the most essential requirement’. Collectively, the cases demonstrate a lack of transparency or consistency, which raises concerns that the courts are descending into a form of individualised discretion. These developments are of particular concern as they come at a time when commentators are predicting a ‘boom’ in estoppel to follow the introduction of electronic conveyancing.

The Mystery of Privity: Grand Trunk Railway Company of Canada v Robinson (1915)

This article examines a little known decision of the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council: Grand Trunk Railway Company of Canada v Robinson (1915). The examination is historical and it provides a different insight into the understanding of privity of contract, a doctrine central to contract law. The examination reveals a process of trans-Atlantic legal migration in which English law was applied to resolve an Ontario case. The nature of the resolution is surprising because it appears to conflict with the better known decision of the House of Lords, Dunlop Pneumatic Tyre Company, Limited v Selfridge and Company, Limited, which a similarly constituted panel delivered in the same week. This article argues that there was a greater malleability in the resolution of cases concerned with privity than was thought to have existed. It is also argued that the power of Canadian railway capitalism is a significant factor in understanding the legal resolution of the case. Finally, it the article considers the use of English and American precedents relevant to the case. The application of English precedents to the case led to a resolution not entirely befitting Canadian conditions.

The role of competition and state aid policy in financial and monetary law

During the financial crisis, companies and lenders found themselves in distressed situations. Competition authorities across the globe had to deal with controversial issues such as the application of the failing firm defence in merger transactions as well as assessment of emergency aid granted by states. This article considers competition policy in periods of crisis, in particular the failing firm defence in merger control and its state aid policy.