LAWSG145 Regulation and Tort

Credit value: 15 credits (7.5 ECTS, 150 learning hours)
Convenor: Maria Lee
Other Teachers: Paul Mitchell
Teaching Delivery: 10 x 2-hour weekly seminars, Term One
Who may enrol: LLM students only
Prerequisites: Whilst there are no pre-requisites for this modle, those who have never studied a common law subject will find it challenging, and must be prepared to do additional preparation
Must not be taken with: None
Qualifying module for: LLM in Public Law;
LLM in Enviromental Law and Policy
Introductory video Currently there is no introductory video for this module
Practice Assessment: Opportunity for feedback on one optional practice essay
Final Assessment: One 3,000-word essay (100%)
Module Overview
Module summary:

This course explores the relationship between regulation and tort. Public or collective goods (such as industrial health and safety, food safety, environmental protection, the security of the economic system) are generally addressed by complex and more or less comprehensive systems of state and supranational regulation. But this is also the realm of private law, since individual rights or interests (eg property, physical integrity, amenity) may be affected by the regulation itself or by a regulated activity. This course examines what happens when these areas of law meet, particularly how the regulatory decision should feed into the determination and protection of rights and interests in private law. The interface between tort and regulation is rarely examined in legal scholarship or legal practice. But in an increasingly heavily regulated world, it is crucial.

Module syllabus:

  • Introduction;
  • nuisance and permitting;
  • fault and regulation;
  • workmen’s compensation;
  • railways;
  • road traffic;
  • corporations, tort and accountability;
  • climate change;
  • financial interests:
  • gambling;
  • conclusions.
Recommended materials:

There is no core text for the course. Module reading lists and other module materials will be provided via online module pages, once students have made their module selections upon enrolment.

Preliminary reading:

  • Chipchase v British Titan Products Co [1956] 1 Q.B. 545
  • Coventry v Lawrence [2014] UKSC 13 (reported as Lawrence v Fen Tigers Ltd [2014] AC 822) – just paras 191-237 (the facts) and Lord Carnwath’s speech (which brings out the main issues – we read the rest of this case later in the course).