6 resultados para liable

em CentAUR: Central Archive University of Reading - UK


Relevância:

10.00% 10.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

This paper is the second of two papers which aim to examine the major legal liability implications of changes to the commercial property loan valuation process caused by the recession in the UK property market and to make recommendations to valuers and their professional institutions to improve the quality of the process and the result. The objectives of this paper are to address a number of the practical implications of changes to the loan valuation process within the context of legal liability. The results of an interview survey of lenders and valuers are reported and analysed. The survey examined the loan valuation process including the selection and instruction of valuers, bases of valuation and valuation reporting. In the selection and instruction process, the findings of the survey reveal two potential problems within the valuer/lender relationship. First, valuers still occasionally accept instructions from borrowers and this could lead to a conflict of interest as lenders may rely on the survey. Second, the occasional lack of formal instructions prior to the delivery of reports casts doubt on the valuer’s ability to correctly identify the needs of clients. Regarding the basis of valuation, it was found that valuers are providing valuations on bases which they do not think are appropriate. Valuers may be legally liable if they do not inform clients of their reservations and this situation must be urgently addressed. The survey also confirms previous research that valuation reports are considered to be light on contextual information concerning markets. The paper concludes by making a number of specific recommendations concerning possible improvements to the commercial property loan valuation process.

Relevância:

10.00% 10.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

The doctrine of joint criminal enterprise is in disarray. Despite repeated judicial scrutiny at the highest level, the doctrine's scope, proper doctrinal basis and function in relation to other modes of complicity remain uncertain. This article examines the doctrine's elements and underlying principles. It argues that while joint criminal enterprise is largely used to make individuals liable for offences committed by their associates in excess of the common criminal purpose, its proper function is to police the limits of associate liability and thus to exculpate rather than inculpate. The doctrine governs not only instances of accessorial liability; it also applies where the parties involved are joint principal offenders. As this puts into question the prevalent view that joint criminal enterprise is a form of secondary participation that results in accessorial liability, the article concludes that it is best seen as a doctrine sui generis.

Relevância:

10.00% 10.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

Children are expensive to raise. Ensuring that they are raised such that they are able to lead a minimally decent life costs time and money, and lots of both. Who is responsible for bearing the costs of the things that children are undoubtedly owed? This is a question that has received comparatively little scrutiny from political philosophers, despite children being such a drain on public and private finances alike. To the extent that there is a debate, two main views can be identified. The Parents Pay view says that parents, responsible for the existence of the costs, must foot the bill. The Society Pays view says that a next generation is a benefit to all, and so to allow parents to foot the bill alone is the worst kind of free-riding. In this paper, I introduce a third potentially liable party currently missing from the debate: children themselves. On my backward-looking view, we are entitled to ask people to contribute to the raising of children on the basis that they have benefited from being raised themselves.

Relevância:

10.00% 10.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

This chapter outlines recent developments in the emergence within Europe of systems of criminal law designed to hold corporate bodies liable where they cause the deaths of workers or members of the public. These changes point to the emergence of a new, more punitive, legal culture in relation to corporate crime. At the same time, however, there is evidence to suggest that this punitive culture is not uniform; different national jurisdictions reflect it to differing degrees. The chapter explores the degree to which the UK’s willingness to criminalise work-related deaths is mirrored elsewhere in Europe, and identifies some factors that might account for variations in this regard. In particular, attention is paid to the influence that social and political culture have on practices in this area. It is written as part of a research handbook on corporate crime in Europe, so has an eye on a more generalist audience in some regards.

Relevância:

10.00% 10.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

This study examines when “incremental” change is likely to trigger “discontinuous” change, using the lens of complex adaptive systems theory. Going beyond the simulations and case studies through which complex adaptive systems have been approached so far, we study the relationship between incremental organizational reconfigurations and discontinuous organizational restructurings using a large-scale database of U.S. Fortune 50 industrial corporations. We develop two types of escalation process in organizations: accumulation and perturbation. Under ordinary conditions, it is perturbation rather than the accumulation that is more likely to trigger subsequent discontinuous change. Consistent with complex adaptive systems theory, organizations are more sensitive to both accumulation and perturbation in conditions of heightened disequilibrium. Contrary to expectations, highly interconnected organizations are not more liable to discontinuous change. We conclude with implications for further research, especially the need to attend to the potential role of managerial design and coping when transferring complex adaptive systems theory from natural systems to organizational systems.

Relevância:

10.00% 10.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

In the present contribution, I discuss the claim, endorsed by a number of authors, that contributing to a collective harm is the ground for special responsibilities to the victims of that harm. Contributors should, between them, cover the costs of the harms they have inflicted, at least if those harms would otherwise be rights-violating. I raise some doubts about the generality of this principle before moving on to sketch a framework for thinking about liability for the costs of harms in general. This framework uses a contractualist framework to build an account of how to think about liability for costs on the basis of the presumably attractive thought that individual agents should have as much control over their liabilities as is compatible with others having like control. I then use that framework to suggest that liability on the basis of contribution should be restricted to cases in which the contributors could have avoided their contribution relatively costlessly, in which meeting the liability is not crippling for them, and in which such a liability would not have chilling effects, either on them or on third parties. This account of the grounds for contributory liability also has the advantage of avoiding a number of awkward questions about what counts as a contribution by shifting the issue away from often unanswerable questions about the precise causal genesis of some harm or other. Instead, control over conduct, which plausibly has some relation to the harm, becomes crucial. On the basis of this account, I then investigate whether a number of uses of the contributory principle are entirely appropriate. I argue that contributory liability is not appropriate for cases of collective harms committed by coordinated groups in the way that, for example, Iris Marion Young and Thomas Pogge have suggested and that further investigation of how members of such groups may be liable will be needed.