Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
  1. Home
  2. Journals
  3. The Cambridge Law Journal
  4. Content listing
Journal Home

Refine listing

Refine listing

Access:
Content type:
Publication date:
Apply   From and To filters
Subject: Show more
Journals: Show more
Publishers: Show more
Societies: Show more
Series: Show more
Collections: Show more

Actions for selected content:

Select all | Deselect all
  • View selected items
  • Export citations
  • Download PDF (zip)
  • Save to Kindle
  • Save to Dropbox
  • Save to Google Drive

Save Search

You can save your searches here and later view and run them again in "My saved searches".

Please provide a title, maximum of 40 characters.
Cancel
×

9363 results in The Cambridge Law Journal

Page 134 of 469

  • CLJ volume 56 issue 1 Cover and Back matter

  • Journal:
    The Cambridge Law Journal / Volume 56 / Issue 1 / March 1997
    Published online by Cambridge University Press:
    16 January 2009, pp. b1-b7
    Print publication:
    March 1997
    • Article
      • You have access
    • PDF
    • Export citation

  • Moral Responsibility and Political Freedom*

  • Bernard Williams
  • Journal:
    The Cambridge Law Journal / Volume 56 / Issue 1 / March 1997
    Published online by Cambridge University Press:
    16 January 2009, pp. 96-102
    Print publication:
    March 1997

  • In the phrase “moral responsibility”, the term “moral” can register two different ideas. On the one hand, it may introduce a particular field of application and a corresponding class of consequences, which are informal and social rather than formal and supported by force. Used in this way, “moral responsibility” is distinguished from legal responsibility. A quite different use of the term is involved when “moral” is introduced to imply a certain basis of assessment, one that places particular emphasis on the voluntary. In this sense, moralresponsibility can be proposed as a basis of assessment even when what is in question is legal responsibility, for instance in relation to the criminal law.

  • The Renewal of the Old

  • David Johnston
  • Journal:
    The Cambridge Law Journal / Volume 56 / Issue 1 / March 1997
    Published online by Cambridge University Press:
    16 January 2009, pp. 80-95
    Print publication:
    March 1997

  • Just as all the best titles have already been used, so have all the best opening lines. To begin, I can do no better than quote the opening words of the inaugural lecture given by my predecessor, Peter Stein, when he took up the Chair of Jurisprudence in the University of Aberdeen. I have changed the names. “When a pupil is appointed to succeed his master in any office it is natural that his feeling of honour should be tempered by humility. But when the master is a scholar of the calibre of Peter Stein, the pupil must exert himself to prevent his humility from degenerating into despair.”

  • Practical Reasoning and Contract as Promise: Extending Contract-based Criteria to Decide Excuse Cases

  • Andrew J. Morris
  • Journal:
    The Cambridge Law Journal / Volume 56 / Issue 1 / March 1997
    Published online by Cambridge University Press:
    16 January 2009, pp. 147-174
    Print publication:
    March 1997

  • Two competing conceptions of contractual obligation dominate modern contract theory. “Neo-classical” scholars characterise contracts primarily as self-imposed, promissory obligations, while “progressive” scholars contend that contracts are primarily state-imposed obligations that have more in common with restitution and tort. Most theorists, located somewhere between these poles, divide the contractual domain into zones of self- and state-imposed obligations but disagree about where to draw the border. This essay considers one of the difficult border areas, the law of impossibility, frustration and mistake, which it will refer to collectively as “excuse”.

Page 134 of 469