David Ibbetson exposes the historical layers beneath the modern rules and principles of contract, tort, and unjust enrichment. Small-scale changes caused by lawyers exploiting procedural advantages in their clients' interest are described & analyzed.

Designed for those studying law for the first time, this book explores where the English common law came from.

Traces the development of Roman Law historically from the earliest times until the age of Justinian.

The civil law systems of continental Europe, Latin America and other parts of the world, including Japan, share a common legal heritage derived from Roman law. However, it is an inheritance which has been modified and adapted over the centuries as a result of contact with Germanic legal concepts, the work of jurists in the mediaeval universities, the growth of the canon law of the western Church, the humanist scholarship of the Renaissance and the rationalism of the natural lawyers of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. This volume provides a critical appreciation of modern civilian systems by examining current rules and structures in the context of their 2,500 year development. It is not a narrative history of civil law, but an historical examination of the forces and influences which have shaped the form and the content of modern codes, as well as the legislative and judicial processes by which they are created are administered.

In law, gains, like losses, don't always lie where they fall. The circumstances in which the law requires defendants to give up their gains are well documented in the work of unjust enrichment lawyers. The same cannot be said, however, of the reasons for ordering restitution of such gains. It is often suggested that unjust enrichment's existence can be demonstrated without inquiry into these reasons, into the principles of justice it represents and invokes. Yet while we can indeed show that there exists a body of claims dealing with the recovery of mistaken payments and the like without going on to inquire into their rationale, this isn't true of unjust enrichment's existence as a distinct ground of such claims. If unjust enrichment exists as a body of like cases and claims, truly independent of contract and tort, it does so by virtue of the distinct reasons it identifies and to which these claims respond. Reason and Restitution examines the reasons which support and shape claims in unjust enrichment and how these reasons bear on the law's resolution of these claims. The identity of these reasons matters. For one thing, unjust enrichment's status as a distinct ground of liability depends on the distinctiveness of these reasons. But, more importantly, it matters to those charged with the practical tasks of deciding cases and making laws, for it is these reasons alone which can direct how judges and legislators ought to respond to these claims.

Alastair Hudson’s Equity and Trusts is an ideal textbook for undergraduate courses on the law of trusts and equitable remedies. It provides a clear, current and comprehensive account of the subject through which the author’s enthusiasm and expertise shine through, helping to bring to life an area of the law which students often find difficult. Beginning with the core principles, Alastair Hudson reinforces the key points by means of clear examples throughout each chapter, helping students to build and develop their own knowledge of equity and trusts. A set of lively, discursive essays reflecting on the law then begin to outline the broader political, social and economic context of the subject and encourage the reader to begin to engage with their own critical analysis. The eighth edition of Equity and Trusts will be edited and updated to include discussion of the key developments in the subject since publication of the seventh edition in 2012, including the latest case law and potential for regulation relating to cohabitation and shared ownership as well as cases arising in the light of the enforcement of the Charities Act 2006.

Examines court proceedings, as well as settlement, mediation and arbitraton.