http://ojls.oxfordjournals.org Oxford Journal of Legal Studies - RSS feed of articles 1464-3820 Oxford Journal of Legal Studies 0143-6503 http://ojls.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/gqp010v1?rss=1 This article tackles two issues: the nature of law's judgment and what, if anything, might be said in its favour. As to the first issue, the article reminds lawyers of the obvious, namely, that law's judgment is abstract, elucidating both what this entails and why it may be thought problematic. The main burden of the article is to consider what might be said in favour of law's abstract judgment. Only one family of arguments, part of a wider but still not all-encompassing class, are considered here: arguments from the rule of law ideal. Three different arguments from the rule of law are examined, the conclusion being that two of three cannot provide unproblematic and unambiguous support for law's abstract judgment.

]]> 2009-06-26 info:doi/10.1093/ojls/gqp010 Oxford University Press 2009-06-26 Article http://ojls.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/gqp012v1?rss=1 This article seeks to understand contractual rights through an examination of the possible ‘property’ content in contracts in the context of the inducement tort and conversion. It argues that, contrary to popular perception, contracts and property are different shades of a similar phenomenon. Not being a reified ‘thing’ with stable features and structure, property is a relative rather than an absolute concept. To determine whether the holder of an intangible resource ought to be conferred with ‘property’ or exclusive control of access to such resource, one has to evaluate the relevant practical, legal and moral considerations. Applied to the context of inducing breach of contract and conversion, this analysis demonstrates that a contractual right is in fact a composite collection of distinct interests and each tort may be protective of one or more of such interests. Thus, liability is imposed for inducing breach of contract because tort law recognizes the promisee's exclusive right to the peremptory status of the promisor's promise. On the other hand, the wrongfulness of converting a contract lies in the usurpation of a contracting party's control, or the exclusive entitlement to decide whether and how to exercise her rights under the contract.

]]> 2009-06-10 info:doi/10.1093/ojls/gqp012 Oxford University Press 2009-06-10 Article