Добавил:

neus500 Опубликованный материал нарушает ваши авторские права? Сообщите нам.

Вуз:

Московский государственный юридический университет им. О.Е. Кутафина

Предмет:

Корпоративное право

Файл:

Экзамен зачет учебный год 2023 / Punitive_Damages__Common_Law_and_Civil_Law_Perspectives__Tort_and_Insurance_Law_.pdf

Скачиваний:

Добавлен:

21.12.2022

Размер:

1.65 Mб

Скачать

☆

1 / 161 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 > Следующая >>>

Tort and Insurance Law

Vol. 25

Edited by the

Institute for European Tort Law of the Austrian Academy of Sciences

Helmut Koziol

Vanessa Wilcox (eds.)

Punitive Damages:

Common Law and Civil Law Perspectives

With Contributions by

Bjarte Askeland	Attila Menyhárd
Jean-Sébastien Borghetti	Johann Neethling
Henry Brooke	Pedro del Olmo
Ina Ebert	Lukas Rademacher
Marta Requejo Isidro	Alessandro P. Scaso
Nils Jansen	Anthony J. Sebok
Bernhard A. Koch	Louis T. Visscher
Helmut Koziol	Vanessa Wilcox

SpringerWienNewYork

Austrian Academy of Sciences Institute for European Tort Law

Reichsratsstraße 17/2

1010 Vienna, Austria

Tel.: +43 1 4277 29651

Fax: +43 1 4277 29670 E-Mail: etl@oeaw.ac.at

This work is subject to copyright.

All rights are reserved, whether the whole or part of the material is concerned, specifically those of translation, reprinting, re-use of illustrations, broadcasting, reproduction by photocopying machines or similar means, and storage in data banks.

Product Liability: The publisher can give no guarantee for all the information contained in this book. This also refers to information about drug dosage and application thereof. In every individual case the respective user must check its accuracy by consulting other pharmaceutical literature.

Printed in Germany

Springer-Verlag Wien New York is part of Springer Science + Business Media springer.at

Typesetting: Composition & Design Services, Minsk, Belarus Printing: Strauss GmbH, 69509 Mörlenbach, Germany

Printed on acid-free and chlorine-free bleached paper

SPIN: 12578559

Library of Congress Control Number: 2009928375

ISSN 1616-8623

ISBN 978-3-211-92210-1 SpringerWienNewYork

This book is dedicated to

Ulrich Magnus

on the occasion of his 65th birthday

Preface

Punitive damages remain one of the most controversial areas in the history of tort law. With the growing literature on the subject, the consensus is that it seems worthwhile and even necessary to discuss, thoroughly and on a comparative basis, the nature, role and suitability of such damages in tort law and private law in general. This is especially so in light of the attempts to reform and unify continental European legal systems and the recent seminal judgments and consultations in this field of law.

The Institute for European Tort Law thus decided to embark on a comprehensive study on punitive damages. The study, which began in 2007, covers jurisdictions that explicitly allow the award of punitive damages, in particular, England, SouthAfrica and the United States as well as those jurisdictions which purport (sometimes emphatically) to deny their existence (although some of them covertly incorporate punitive damages into the framework of their tort systems). The position in France, Germany, Hungary, Italy, the Scandinavian countries, Spain as well as EU law is thus considered. This book also includes reports on punitive damages from an insurance, law and economics and private international law perspective. A report on aggravated damages precedes a comparative report and conclusions. This book follows a conference held in November 2008 that was chaired by Sir Henry Brooke, whose chairmanship of the Law Commission for England and Wales coincided with the start of the Commission’s consultation on punitive damages, and Prof. Ken Oliphant, the newly appointed Director of the Institute for Tort and Insurance Law.

We would like to thank the Institute staff, in particular, Mag. Lisa Zeiler and Thomas Thiede LL.B, LL.M for their help in making the Conference a success. We would also like to thank Mag. Christian Jöllinger, Mag. Kathrin Karner-Strobach and JUDr. Petra Pipkova for their valuable and varied assistance in producing this publication.

Helmut Koziol and Vanessa Wilcox

Vienna/Strasbourg, April 2009

Table of Contents
A Brief Introduction: The Origins of Punitive Damages
(Sir Henry Brooke)...........................................................................................		1
COUNTRY REPORTS............................................................................................		5
Punitive Damages in England
(Vanessa Wilcox)..............................................................................................		7
I.	Introduction........................................................................................	7
II.	The Three Categories: The Categories Test.......................................	8
III.	The Cause of Action Test Abolished................................................	19
IV.	Factors Relevant to an Assessment of Punitive Damages ...............	25
V.	The Case against Punitive Damages................................................	32
VI.	Alternative Remedies – Gain Based Damages ................................	51
VII. Other ................................................................................................		53
VIII. Conclusions......................................................................................		53
Punitive Damages in France
(Jean-Sébastien Borghetti).............................................................................		55
I.	Introduction......................................................................................	55
II.	A Hidden Presence of Punitive Damages? ......................................	56
III.	Towards the Official Introduction of Punitive Damages? ...............	67
Punitive Damages in Germany
(Nils Jansen and Lukas Rademacher)............................................................		75
I.	Introduction......................................................................................	75
II.	The Debate on Punitive Damages....................................................	76
III.	Conclusions......................................................................................	85
Punitive Damages in Hungary
(Attila Menyhárd)...........................................................................................		87
I.	Introduction......................................................................................	87
II.	Definition of Punitive Damages ......................................................	88
III.	Function and Rationality of Punitive Damages...............................	89
IV.	Regulatory and Policy Context........................................................	89
V.	No Punitive Damages in Hungarian Tort Law.................................	91
VI.	Punitive Elements in Hungarian Private Law..................................	92
VII. Policy Aspects of Punitive Damages in Hungarian Tort Law..........		98
VIII. Conclusions....................................................................................		102

X		Table of Contents
Punitive Damages in Italy
(Alessandro P. Scarso) .................................................................................			103
I.	Introduction....................................................................................		103
II.	Compensation for Damage in Personal Injury Cases ....................		104
III.	Punitive Damages under the Italian Legal System........................		106
IV.	Statutory Provisions and the Punitive Purpose of Tort Law..........		109

V.Compensation for Damage and the Standard of the

	Wrongdoer’s Conduct.....................................................................	111
VI.	Conclusions....................................................................................	113
Punitive Damages in Scandinavia
(Bjarte Askeland) .........................................................................................		115
I.	Introduction....................................................................................	115
II.	Elements of Punitive Damages under Norwegian Tort Law .........	116
III.	Elements of Punitive Damages under Swedish Tort Law..............	120
IV.	Elements of Punitive Damages under Danish Tort Law................	121
V.	Conclusions....................................................................................	122
Punitive Damages in South Africa
(Johann Neethling).......................................................................................		123
I.	Introduction....................................................................................	123
II.	Law of Delict .................................................................................	123
III.	The Law of Contract......................................................................	135
IV.	Copyright Law...............................................................................	136
Punitive Damages in Spain
(Pedro del Olmo) .........................................................................................		137
I.	Introduction....................................................................................	137
II.	Specific Legally Based Arguments................................................	140
III.	Other Arguments............................................................................	151
IV.	Difficulties and Plays on Words.....................................................	152
V.	Conclusions....................................................................................	153
Punitive Damages in the United States
(Anthony J. Sebok) .......................................................................................		155
I.	Introduction....................................................................................	155
II.	The Three Eras of American Punitive Damages............................	159
III.	The Purposes of Punitive Damages in American Tort Law...........	169
IV.	Rules for Juries (Or Other Factfinders) .........................................	180
V.	Constitutional Constraints .............................................................	189
Punitive Damages in European Law
(Bernhard A. Koch)......................................................................................		197
I.	Introduction....................................................................................	197
II.	Conflicts of Concepts in Legislative Drafts...................................	197
III.	“Effective, Proportionate and Dissuasive” ....................................	200
IV.	Equal Treatment of Damages Awards............................................	202
V.	Punitive Damages by Way of Import.............................................	205
VI.	Competing for a New Standard .....................................................	207
VII.	Conclusions....................................................................................	208

Table of Contents		XI
SPECIAL REPORTS..........................................................................................		211
Punitive Damages and Liability Insurance
(Ina Ebert)....................................................................................................		213
I.	Introduction ....................................................................................	213
II.	The Insurability of Punitive Damages ...........................................	214
III.	Conclusions ....................................................................................	217
Economic Analysis of Punitive Damages
(Louis T. Visscher)........................................................................................		219
I.	Introduction ....................................................................................	219
II.	Economic Reasons for Punitive Damages: Deterrence .................	222
III.	Economic Reasons for Punitive Damages: Punishment ................	229
IV.	Tension between the Goals of Deterrence and Punishment ...........	232
V.	Conclusions ....................................................................................	236
Punitive Damages From a Private International Law Perspective
(Marta Requejo Isidro) ................................................................................		237
I.	Introduction ....................................................................................	237
II.	Service of Claim Seeking Punitive Damages ................................	239
III.	Recognition and Enforcement of Punitive Damages Awards ........	245
IV.	Punitive Damages as Part of the Applicable Law ..........................	252
V.	Conclusions ....................................................................................	254
Aggravated Damages
(Anthony J. Sebok/Vanessa Wilcox) .............................................................		257
I.	Introduction ....................................................................................	257
II.	Aggravated Damages under English Law ....................................	258
III.	Aggravated Damages in Other Jurisdictions .................................	266
IV.	Aggravated Damages under American Law ..................................	269
Punitive Damages: Admission into the Seventh Legal Heaven or Eternal
Damnation?
Comparative Report and Conclusions
(Helmut Koziol)............................................................................................		275
I.	Introduction ....................................................................................	275
II.	The Common Law .........................................................................	276
III.	Continental European Legal Systems ............................................	282
IV.	The European Union ......................................................................	288
V.	Shifting From Punitive to Preventative Damages .........................	289
VI.	Arguments in Favour of Punitive Damages and
	Counterarguments ..........................................................................	293
VII. Further Arguments against Punitive Damages...............................		296
VIII. Additional Observations ................................................................		303
IX.	Conclusions ....................................................................................	305
ANNEX	...........................................................................................................	309
Index............................................................................................................		323
Publications ................................................................................................		331

A Brief Introduction: The Origins of Punitive

Damages

Sir Henry Brooke*
The primary purpose of an award of damages is to compensate the claimant for	1
the harm that has been done to him: to put the claimant back, so far as money
can do it, in the position in which he would have been if the wrong had not
been done to him. In addition to purely compensatory damages, under English
law, the award may also contain an element of aggravated damages, arising
perhaps from the way the defendant behaved when committing the original
wrong, or how he has continued to behave after the claim was made against
him. Punitive or exemplary damages, as we prefer to call them in England and
Wales, are quite different. They may be awarded in cases where it is felt that
mere compensation is insufficient: cases where the defendant’s conduct has
been so outrageous as to merit punishment as well.
Exemplary damages first made their appearance on the legal scene in England	2

in the 1760s. This happened during a series of cases in which the government of the day was trying to suppress the publication of a paper known as the North Briton with which a notorious politician called John Wilkes was associated. Individuals suffered wrongful interference with their liberty at the hands of public officials and, in the absence of a code, the English common law judges awarded non-compensatory damages – or told juries that they might award such damages – if the defendant’s behaviour seemed bad enough, without troubling too much to classify these damages under any particular heading. There were plenty of cases in the law reports in which awards of what we now call exemplary damages were made at levels lower than the House of Lords. There followed similar awards, made in different contexts, and over the next 200 years exemplary damages were awarded from time to time not only in cases of assault, false imprisonment, defamation, seduction and malicious prosecution, but also in cases of trespass to land, and eventually trespass to goods.

*Sir Henry Brooke is a retired British judge. He was chairman of the Law Commission from 1993–1995 and was appointed Lord Justice of Appeal in 1996. He was Vice President of the Court of Appeal (Civil Division) from 2003–2006, is chairman of the Trustees of BAILII (the free access legal website) and was until February 2009 a member (formerly chairman) of the Board of Editors of the White Book. Sir Henry now sits occasionally as a member of the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council.

2	Sir Henry Brooke

3In the fullness of time countries that were formerly English colonies developed their own versions of the common law, and sometimes these diverged in significant respects from the way in which the common law was being developed in England. In particular, after the House of Lords, England’s highest court, had endeavoured to rationalise the law and place curbs on its continuing development in the mid-1960s, the High Court of Australia refused to accept these curbs. In those days there was still an avenue of appeal from the highest Australian court to the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council, and in their capacity as Australia’s highest court the Privy Council refused to interfere, recognising the right ofAustralian judges to develop the common law in the manner they thought most appropriate for that jurisdiction. Canada and New Zealand have also declined to follow the modern English approach. Today, exemplary damages still continue to form a part of the law of these jurisdictions, and, prolifically, that of the U.S.A. They also form part of the law of Northern Ireland, Ireland and Wales but they have never formed part of the law of Scotland.

4Exemplary damages have, since their beginning, been an extremely controversial topic among judges, lawyers, legislators and academics alike. I was Chairman of the Law Commission in the early 1990s, when we published a consultation paper inviting people’s views on the appropriateness of retaining exemplary damages as a remedy available in English law. We also asked them, if it were to be retained, what reforms were needed, and whether these reforms could be achieved by judicial development or whether statutory intervention was required to put the law back on the rails. I remember that the Commissioner who took over responsibility for this project half way through its course embarked on it with a frame of mind which was intellectually opposed to them, because they constituted such an illogical anomaly. Opinion on consultation was so polarised that before I left the Commission in December 1995 we took the unusual step of publishing a supplementary consultation paper, outlining three possible models for reform. A considerable majority of consultees then favoured the retention of exemplary damages.

5Those who support the availability of exemplary damages in appropriate cases say that they provide a suitable means of punishing minor criminal acts which are in practice ignored by the criminal system. The police, they say, should be principally concerned with the pursuit of serious crime.

6The opponents of exemplary damages say that they are an anomaly, and that they confuse the civil and criminal functions of the law. They say that it is particularly anomalous that the claimant in the particular action should recover a financial windfall. They feel that any award imposed by way of punishment should be paid to the state.

7While jurisdictions which admit punitive damages into their legal systems continue to grapple with their oddities and inconsistencies and question whether it is appropriate for them to retain, legislate, reform or abolish exemplary damages altogether, other jurisdictions – in particular, those on the continent – have

A Brief Introduction: The Origins of Punitive Damages

recently begun to support the idea of exemplary damages, or at least elements of them, in appropriate cases, with the hope that the awards of such damages might help to buttress their laws.

This book thus explores how exemplary damages have developed in key juris- 8 dictions since their origin over 200 years ago, as a means of deterring the torts

of our times. Reports from England and the United States describe their aims, their scope, their application, their strengths and their shortcomings and outline doctrinal debates on the controversies surrounding them while the South African report offers an insight into its unique, mixed tort system. Just as an important part of the Anglo-Saxon temperament is to distrust codes of law, so too, an important part of the continental temperament is to distrust punitive damages. However, just as codification exists in one form or another in AngloSaxon jurisdictions, it would be unsurprising if some courts and legislatures on the continent impliedly or covertly award exemplary damages to deter behaviour that is sufficiently outrageous. The reports from Denmark, France, Germany, Hungary, Italy, Norway, Spain, Sweden and also on EU law seek to ascertain the extent to which this proposition is true.

1 / 161 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 > Следующая >>>

Соседние файлы в папке Экзамен зачет учебный год 2023

#
21.12.2022194.44 Кб9Presentation_shareholders_39_agreement.pptx
#
21.12.20221.24 Mб9Prezentatsia_optsiony.ppt
#
23.12.20225.73 Mб7Problemy_korporativnogo_prava_i_pravovoy_politiki_Lektsia_10_21112016.ppt
#
21.12.20224.14 Mб13product_liability_in_comparative_perspective.pdf
#
23.12.2022525.43 Кб9Proekt_Minyusta.rtf
#
21.12.20221.65 Mб10Punitive_Damages__Common_Law_and_Civil_Law_Perspectives__Tort_and_Insurance_Law_.pdf
#
23.12.202234.53 Кб9Sabirov_A_M_Prinuditelny_vykup2_1.docx
#
20.12.20226.68 Mб16Shitkina_I_s_Korporativnoe_Pravo_2015.pdf
#
21.12.2022216.51 Кб7Soglashenie_aktsionerov_rossii_774_skoe_pravo_praktikum.pptx
#
21.12.2022188.58 Кб10SPA_Rus.pptx
#
21.12.2022134.36 Кб10Stepanov - Charter Capital.pdf

Preface

Table of Contents