The Tort Caused by the Transmission of Coronavirus Infection (A comparative study)
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.35246/jols.v37i1.458Keywords:
Specific enforcement, Specific Performance, Injunction, Remedies for breach of contract, discharge of contract by Breach, affirmation of contract, discharge by performance, contempt of courtAbstract
The English judge while dealing with the contractual breach، takes into account an aim that the legal solution he makes consistent with justice. Such concept allows the judge to order for the specific enforcement of the debtor’s contractual obligation if the compensation was not a sufficient remedy to redress the damage resulting from that breach. However، the conditions imposed by the rules of justice and the impediments that make the technical scope of this remedy very limited in the positive aspect. And modest in his negative one '' injunction''. Despite of its complementary function among the remedies for contractual breach، specific enforcement in English law may affect legal consequences because of its unique nature، some of which may make the debtor liable in accordance with the penal law.
Downloads
References
The Sources are in Arabic.
First: Legal Books
i. Cheshire, c. s. and Vivot, S. e. and Fermston, M. B, 1976, The Reasons for The Expiry of the Contract - Loyalty, Dismissal, Impossibility, Breach - Translated by Henry Riad, Publisher Dar Al-Jeel, Beirut.
ii. Al-Farouqi, Harith Suleiman, 2003, The Legal Dictionary, English-Arabic, Library of Lebanon, Fifth Edition.
iii. Al-Bazzaz, Abd Al-Rahman, 1967, Principles of Comparative Law, M atba't Al-Ani, Baghdad.
iv. Manhal, Dr. Ali Hussein, 2020, The Theory of Effective Breach of Contract, a Comparative Study in The Light of The Economic Analysis of The Law, Al-Markez Al_Arabi Lldrasat Walbhoth Al-ilmia.
v. Taha, Dr. Ghani Hassoun, 1971, Brief in The General Theory of Commitment, Book One, Sources of Commitment, Matba't Al-Ma'rf, Baghdad.
vi. Al-Anbaki, Dr. Majid, 2001, Principles of Contract in English Law, Baghdad, No Place of Publication.
vii. Qassem, Dr. Mohamed Hassan, 2017, Civil Law Obligations, Sources, Volume One, Contract, Dar Al_Jamea' Al-Jadeda, Alexandria.
viii. Adawy, Dr. Mustafa Abd Al-Hamid, 2008, The damage Arising From a Contractual Breach in English law, Dar Al-Nahdha Al-Arabiya, Cairo.
ix. Al-Aboudi, Dr. Nawras Abbas, and Al-Saadi, Dr. Jalil Hassan, 2022, The Defective Implementation of The Contractual Obligation "a comparative study", Al-Markez Al-Qaume Llisdarat Al-Qanoniya, Cairo, first edition.
x. Attia, Dr. Walid Khaled, 2015, The General Theory of The Duty to Reduce Damages in Contracts, a Comparative Study Between Anglo-Saxon and Civil Laws and International Sales Contracts, Manshorat Al-Halabi Al-Hoquqia, Beirut.
Second: Legal Research.
i. Al-Saadi, Dr. Jalil Hassan, 2010, The Origins of the Contract in English and Iraqi Laws, Research published in the Journal of Legal Sciences, University of Baghdad, College of Law, Volume Twenty-fifth, Issue 1.
ii. Saleh, Dr. Roaa Abdel Sattar and Al-Saadi, Prof. Dr.Jalil Hassan, and Assistant Lecturer Khalaf, Bassem Daheeb, 2018, Future Harm, Research Published in The Legal Journal, Cairo University, College of Law, issue 1.
iii. Zarzour, Assistant Lecturer Wasan Kazem, 2016, The Concept of Expected Breach of Contract and Its Legal Applications, a Comparative Study, Research Published in Risalat al-huquq Journal, University of Karbala, College of Law, eighth year, issue3.
iv. Attia, Dr. Walid Khaled, 2011, Restrictions on The Compensation For Contractual Damage in English law (a Comparative Study), Research Published in The Journal of Al-Mohaqiq Al-Hilli for Legal and Political Sciences, University of Babylon, issue 3.
v. Ali, Dr. Yunus Salah El-Din, 2017, Treatment of Damages Resulting From Civil Error in English Law, Research Published in The Journal of Law for Legal and Economic Research, Alexandria University, volume 2, issue 2.
Third : The Laws.
Iraqi Civil Law No. (40) of 1951.
Legislative Decree No. 131 of 2016 amending the French Civil Code.
The resources are in English
St: books And Journals.
i. Catherine Elliott and Frances Quinn ، 2009, Contract Law، Seventh edition، Ashford Colour Press Ltd.
ii. David Pearce and Roger Halson، Damages For Breach Of Contract: Compensation، Restitution ، And Vindication. a research published at Oxford Journal of Legal Studies، White Rose Research Online، available at:http://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/3518/
iii. G.H. Treitel، 1979, An Outline Of The Law Of contract، Butterworths، 2nd Edition، London.
iv. Geoff Monahn، 2001, Essential Contract law، Cavendish Publishing (Australia) Pty Limited، 2nd edition ،Sydney.
v. George M. Cohen، 2009, The Fault That Lies Within Our Contract Law، Michigan Law Review، Volume 107 | Issue 8.
vi. Gregory E. Maggs، Comparative Contract Law American and European، Materials Prepared For the Augsburg Summer Program in European and International Economic Law، available at: http://maggs.us/gwlaw/comparative-contracts.pdf
vii. Hayk Kupelyants، Speccofic Performance in draft common Frame of reference،UCL Journal of Law and Jurisprudencea a research available at; https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/1470669/1/1(2)UCLJLJ15%20-%20Specific%20Performance.pdf
viii. Mary Charman، 2007, Contract Law، Willan publishing،4th edition.
ix. Richard stone، 2002, The Modern Law Of contract، Cavendish publishing limited ،5th edition، London.
x. Tareq Al-Tawil، damages for breach of contract :compensation، cost of cure and vindication، a research available at: http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/journals/AdelLawRw/2013/19.pdf
xi. THOMAS D. MUSGRAVE، 2008 – 2009, Comparative Contractual Remedies، The University of Western Australia ، Law Review، VOLUME 34.
nd: sites.
i. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coop_Insurance_Society_Ltd_v_Argyll_Stores_Holdings_Ltd
ii. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/damage
iii. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/remedy
iv. https://theblackletter.co.uk/2017/10/18/hasham-v-zenab/
v. https://www.lawteacher.net/cases/white-and-carter-v-mcgregor.php
vi. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lumley_v_Wagner
vii. https://www.oxfordreference.com/view/10.1093/oi/authority.20110803100522232
viii. http://e-lawresources.co.uk/cases/Warner-Bros-v-Nelson.php
ix. https://e-lawresources.co.uk/cases/Page-One-Records-v-Britton.php
x. https://lawprof.co/contract/remedies-for-breach-cases/warren-v-mendy-1989-1-w-l-r-853/
xi. http://www.e-lawresources.co.uk/cases/Cohen-v-Roche.php
xii. https://e-lawresources.co.uk/cases/Patel-v-Ali.php
rd: Table Of Cases:
i. Cohen V. Roche 1927.
ii. Co-op Insurance society Ltd V. Argyll stores Holding Ltd 1997.
iii. Denne v. light 1857.
iv. Dominion Coal Co. V. Dominion Iron & steel Co. 1909.
v. E.G. Wolverhampton Corp. V. Emmons 1901.
vi. Errington v. Aynesly 1788.
vii. Falcke V. Gray 1859.
viii. Flight V. Bolland 1828.
ix. Flint V. Brandon 1803.
x. Harnett V. Yielding 1805.
xi. Hasham V. Zeneb 1960.
xii. Jeune V. Queen's Gross Properties Ltd 1974.
xiii. Lumley V.Wagner 1852.
xiv. Page One Records Ltd v Britton 1968.
xv. Patel V. Ali 1983.
xvi. Platel V. Ali 1984.
xvii. Pollard V. Clayton 1855.
xviii. Posner v. Scott-Lewis 1986.
xix. Ryan v. Mutual Tontine Association 1893.
xx. Shell U.K. Ltd V. Lostock Garage Ltd 1976.
xxi. Walters V. Morgan 1861.
xxii. Walters V. Morgan 1861.
xxiii. Warner Bros Pictures Inc. V. Nelson 1937.
xxiv. Warren v Mendy 1989.
xxv. White & Carter (Councils) Ltd v McGregor 1962.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2022 Journal of Legal Sciences
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Copyright and Licensing:
For all articles published in Journal of Legal Sciences, copyright is retained by the authors. Articles are licensed under an open access Creative Commons CC BY 4.0 license, meaning that anyone may download and read the paper for free. In addition, the article may be reused and quoted provided that the original published version is cited. These conditions allow for maximum use and exposure of the work.
Reproducing Published Material from other Publishers: It is absolutely essential that authors obtain permission to reproduce any published material (figures, schemes, tables or any extract of a text) which does not fall into the public domain, or for which they do not hold the copyright. Permission should be requested by the authors from the copyrightholder (usually the Publisher, please refer to the imprint of the individual publications to identify the copyrightholder).
Permission is required for: Your own works published by other Publishers and for which you did not retain copyright.
Substantial extracts from anyones' works or a series of works.
Use of Tables, Graphs, Charts, Schemes and Artworks if they are unaltered or slightly modified.
Photographs for which you do not hold copyright.
Permission is not required for: Reconstruction of your own table with data already published elsewhere. Please notice that in this case you must cite the source of the data in the form of either "Data from..." or "Adapted from...".
Reasonably short quotes are considered fair use and therefore do not require permission.
Graphs, Charts, Schemes and Artworks that are completely redrawn by the authors and significantly changed beyond recognition do not require permission.
Obtaining Permission
In order to avoid unnecessary delays in the publication process, you should start obtaining permissions as early as possible. If in any doubt about the copyright, apply for permission. Journal of Legal Sciences cannot publish material from other publications without permission.
The copyright holder may give you instructions on the form of acknowledgement to be followed; otherwise follow the style: "Reproduced with permission from [author], [book/journal title]; published by [publisher], [year].' at the end of the caption of the Table, Figure or Scheme.
