Atjaunināt sīkdatņu piekrišanu

Negligence Liability of Public Authorities 2nd Revised edition [Hardback]

(Barrister, Matrix Chambers), (Barrister, One Crown Office Row)
  • Formāts: Hardback, 960 pages, height x width x depth: 253x177x56 mm, weight: 1708 g
  • Izdošanas datums: 20-Jun-2019
  • Izdevniecība: Oxford University Press
  • ISBN-10: 0199692556
  • ISBN-13: 9780199692552
Citas grāmatas par šo tēmu:
  • Hardback
  • Cena: 438,35 €
  • Grāmatu piegādes laiks ir 3-4 nedēļas, ja grāmata ir uz vietas izdevniecības noliktavā. Ja izdevējam nepieciešams publicēt jaunu tirāžu, grāmatas piegāde var aizkavēties.
  • Daudzums:
  • Ielikt grozā
  • Piegādes laiks - 4-6 nedēļas
  • Pievienot vēlmju sarakstam
Negligence Liability of Public Authorities 2nd Revised editionPalielināt
  • Formāts: Hardback, 960 pages, height x width x depth: 253x177x56 mm, weight: 1708 g
  • Izdošanas datums: 20-Jun-2019
  • Izdevniecība: Oxford University Press
  • ISBN-10: 0199692556
  • ISBN-13: 9780199692552
Citas grāmatas par šo tēmu:
Permanent link: https://www.kriso.lv/db/9780199692552.html
Keywords:
Whether, and in what circumstances, public authorities should be held liable for negligence in the performance of their public functions is a highly complex area of the law. Written by two leading barristers, the first edition of The Negligence Liability of Public Authorities provided a much needed guide to these complexities and offered a detailed account of the law for practitioners and academics.

This second edition builds on the reputation of the first, including full coverage of the many important cases which have been decided since 2006. Divided into two Parts, Part I focuses on the extent to which the public nature of a defendant affects civil liability and the principles that govern and limit that liability. Part II considers the law as it impacts upon specific areas of public authorities' activities. It examines cases in a range of key areas, including the police, social services, highways, education, and the emergency services and aims to set out in a comprehensive way the different legal issues that have arisen in each area. By examining cases in a variety of jurisdictions, including Australia, Canada, South Africa, New Zealand and the USA, the authors further broaden the scope of this authoritative text. The book also identifies the underlying principles and policy arguments which have shaped the law more generally, making it an extremely useful resource for a wide variety of practitioners.

Recenzijas

this book is an invaluable and thought-provoking reference for anyone engaged in this diverse and continually changing field. * Phillip Taylor MBE, Head of Chambers, and Elizabeth Taylor, Richmond Green Chamber * Review from previous edition "This is a blockbuster book....This excellent analysis will be invaluable for the courts, for litigators and for others who contemplate the kaleidoscopic intricacies. * Julian Fulbrook, THES * '...the authors discuss every case and every policy argument. Their systematic approach, together with the analysis of the duty of care, and of concepts such as justiciability, add much value. * Mads Andenas, Law Quarterly Review * "The Negligence Liability of Public Authorities is a tour de force that exposes this large and complex body of case law to a lengthy, detailed and critical analysis. * S. H. Bailey, Professional Negligence *

Table of Cases xxvii
Table of Legislation lvii
1 The Problem of Public Authority Negligence Liability 1(22)
A Why Has the Search for Stable Principles Proven so Elusive?
1 The intersection between private and public law
a Public law hurdles
b Liability for omissions
2 The intersection of law and politics
3 Protecting public authorities and compensating the deserving
B Trends in the Law
1 Public authorities treated like private parties: pre 1970s
2 Recognition of significance of public nature: 1970 to late 1980s
3 Public policy restrictions on duties: late 1980s to late 1990s
4 Rejection of blanket policy considerations: late 1990s to mid 2000s
5 Growth of alternative methods for limiting liability: mid 2000s onwards
6 Possibility of statutory reform
2 Justiciability 23(48)
A Introduction
1 Overview of justiciability
2 Development of the law
3 Structure of this chapter
B The Meaning of Justiciability
1 Technical/functional competence of court to resolve dispute
a Issues unsuitable for judicial resolution
b Polycentric disputes
2 Place of the courts within the democratic process
C Tests for Determining Justiciability
1 The approach taken in the Dorset Yacht and X cases
a Ultra vires decisions and public law hurdles
b The policy/operational distinction
c Criticism of the vires and policy/operational tests
2 The approach to justiciability in the Barrett and Phelps cases
a Departure from strict vires test
b Departure from strict policy/operational test
c Summary of justiciability in the Bo vett and Phelps cases
3 Evaluation of the Barrett and Phelps approach
a Meaning of 'justiciability' unclear
b Problems of use of vires test and policy/operational distinction
c Meaning of 'suitability' for judicial determination
4 Revisiting X/Dorset Yacht and Barrett/Phelps: Connor v Surrey CC?
D Applications of Justiciability Tests to Particular Areas of Law
1 Detention
2 Education and social services
3 Police and emergency services
4 Armed Forces
5 Health policy, and health and safety, and other regulators
6 Highways
7 Land use
8 Summary of factors considered in determining justiciability
E An Alternative Approach to Justiciability
1 Focus on the 'form' of a decision
2 Application to decided cases
3 Rationale for approach
F Underlying Difficulty of Justiciability Determinations
3 Duty of Care 71(72)
A Introduction
1 Meaning of 'duty of care'
B Determining Whether a Duty of Care is Owed
1 The Anns approach and its decline
2 Incrementalism
3 Incrementalism and public authorities
4 Development of the Caparo tripartite test
5 When is the tripartite test applicable?
a Pure economic losses
b Infliction of physical injury by a direct and positive act
6 Shifting away from the tripartite test?
7 The elements of the tripartite test
C Caparo Test: Foreseeability
D Caparo Test: Proximity
1 Meaning of proximity
2 Grounds for denying proximity
a Claimant as indistinguishable from general public
b Conflicting duties owed to someone other than claimant
3 Grounds for establishing proximity
a Categorical relationships
b Analogous categories
c 'Special relationships' and 'assumption of responsibility'
4 Rationale for proximity rules
a Liability to unlimited class
b Rationale for proximity rules in conflict cases
E Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights and the Duty of Care
1 The decisions in the Osman and Z cases
a The Osman case
b Z v United Kingdom
2 The continuing impact of Article 6 following the Z case
a Procedural versus substantive bars to access to the court
b Article 6 and public policy
F Pure Economic Losses
1 Rationale for restrictions on liability for economic losses
2 Categorizing losses as economic or physical in defective property cases
3 Circumstances in which liability can be imposed for pure economic losses
4 Public authorities and pure economic losses
a Purchasers of defective property
b Over-zealous and careless regulation
c Inaccurate advice
G Psychiatric Harm
1 Primary victims
a 'Participants' in traumatic events
b Work-related stress
c Rescuers
2 Secondary victims
H Omissions
1 Rationale for act/omission distinction
2 Proximity and omissions
3 When can liability be imposed for a pure omission?
a Failure to exercise statutory powers
b Affirmative duties to act at common law
c 'General reliance'
4 Distinguishing between acts and omissions
a Creation of danger
b Precluding alternative means of protection
4 Arguments of Public Policy 143(62)
A Introduction: The Third Limb of the Caparo Test
1 Applicable policy considerations
2 Principles underpinning policy concerns
3 Trends in the law
B Public Policy Arguments
1 The remedying of wrongs and private party analogies
a Rationale for private party analogies
b Infliction of physical injury by a direct and positive act
c Private party analogies in cases not involving direct infliction of physical harm
2 Diversion of resources
a Traditional arguments
b Counter-arguments
c Analysis of resources arguments
3 Defensive practices
a Traditional arguments
b Counter-arguments
c Analysis of defensiveness arguments
d The current approach to defensiveness arguments
4 Delicate relationships and multi-disciplinary practices
a Traditional arguments
b Current approach
5 'Flood-gates'
a Traditional arguments
b Counter-arguments
c Analysis of flood-gates arguments and the courts' current approach
6 Alternative remedies
a Traditional arguments
b Counter-arguments
c The courts' current approach and analysing alternative remedies arguments
7 Duty of care, conflict, and underlying purpose of public authority powers
a Nature of policy consideration
b Regulatory authorities
c Non-regulatory authorities
8 Benefits of imposing a duty of care
C Conclusion: Changing Approaches to the 'Fair, Just and Reasonable' Limb
1 The policy considerations rejected in the Barrett and Phelps cases
2 Shift to other techniques to limit liability
3 Shift from 'consequential' to 'separation of powers' arguments
4 Evidence and public policy arguments
5 Other Aspects of Negligence Claims 205(48)
A Introduction
B Breach of Duty and Standard of Care
1 Application of the Bolam test
a When will a defendant be regarded as a 'professional'?
b First limb of Bolam test
c Second limb of Bolam test
d The Bolam test and causation
e The Bolam test and public authorities
f Limits of the Bolam test
2 The standard of care when responding to an emergency
a Lack of time for considered thought and other relevant circumstances
b Weighing public benefit of defendant's activities
3 Failure to follow government guidance
4 Negligence and ultra wires acts
5 Resource constraints on public authorities and the standard of care
6 Can liability be established without proving fault?
C Causation
1 Factual causation
2 Legal causation
D Damages
1 Personal injury
a Pecuniary losses
b Non-pecuniary losses
2 Damage to property
3 Damages in educational and social services cases
E Vicarious and Direct Liability
1 Unauthorized acts
2 Public authorities and direct liability
F Non-delegable Duty
G Strike-out Applications and Summary Judgment
1 Procedural framework
2 Changes brought about by the CPR
3 Relationship between summary judgment and strike-out applications
4 Summary judgment of factual issues
5 Determining whether a duty of care is owed at preliminary hearings
a The impact of the decision in Osman v United Kingdom
b The decision in Z v United Kingdom
c The current approach to summary dismissal of claims for want of duty of care
6 Alternative Remedies 253(38)
A Introduction
B Misfeasance in Public Office
1 Introduction
2 Elements of the tort
a Exercise of public power by public officer
b Mental elements
3 Damages in misfeasance claims
a Is proof of loss necessary?
b What form of material damage must the claimant establish?
c Exemplary damages in misfeasance claims
4 Vicarious liability
5 Vicarious liability and exemplary damages
C Breach of Statutory Duty
1 Introduction
2 Breach of statutory duty and negligence claims
3 Does breach of statutory duty give rise to right to damages?
a Duties imposed to protect particular class of person
b Alternative means of enforcing statute
c Alternative approach: statutes imposing welfare or administrative duties
4 Standard of care and causation
D Judicial Review
E Non-judicial Means of Obtaining Redress
1 Ombudsmen
a Complaints of maladministration
b Remedies
c Complaints to the Ombudsmen and legal remedies
d Advantages and disadvantages of pursuing complaints through Ombudsmen
2 Internal complaints procedures
7 Human Rights Act 1998 291(64)
A Introduction
B The Structure of the HRA
C The European Convention on Human Rights: General Principles
1 Convention rights imposing positive obligations
a Standard of care in positive obligations cases
2 Margin of appreciation and discretionary area of judgment
D The European Convention on Human Rights: Convention Rights
1 Article 2: Right to life
a Nature of the obligation under Article 2
b Article 2 and common law negligence claims
c Article 2 and specific public authorities
2 Article 3: Prohibition on inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
a Ill-treatment falling within the ambit of Article 3
b Knowledge of ill-treatment
c Nature of public authorities' obligations under Article 3
d Children abused by public authority employees
e Investigations of child abuse allegations
f Failure to investigate and prosecute crimes committed by non-state actors
3 Article 8: Failure to prevent interference with private and family life and home
a Article 8 in child care cases
b Environmental harm and interference with the home
c Administration of benefits, welfare support, child maintenance: Limitations on the scope of Article 8
d Decisions to prosecute
4 Article 2 of the First Protocol: The right to education
E Damages Under the HRA
1 HRA principles for determining damages
a Discretionary nature of the award under the HRA
b 'Residual' remedy?
c Taking into account the consequences of an award of damages
d Must the claimant establish fault to be awarded damages?
e Relationship with the ECHR
2 The approach taken by the European Court of Human Rights
a Applicable principles
b Causation
c Heads of loss
d Quantum of damages in specific areas
3 UK courts' decisions on damages under the HRA
8 Social Services 355(68)
A Introduction
B General Principles
1 Breach of statutory duty
2 Common law duty of care
a Introduction and summary of law
b The decision in the X case
c The policy factors in the Xcase
d The development of the law following the Xcase
e The current law
3 Standard of care
a Application of the Bolam test
b Children injured in accidents at home
c Children abused in institutional care
4 Vicarious liability
a Conduct in the 'course of employment'
b Tortfeasors who are not employees of the defendant
5 Non-delegable duty
6 Damages
7 Limitation periods
C Specific Instances of Social Service Negligence
1 Responses to evidence of abuse by third parties
a Over-zealous investigation of abuse
b Failure to protect children or vulnerable adults from harm
2 Children not properly looked after while in local authority care
a Negligent decisions as to upbringing of child in care
b Accidental physical injuries to child in care
c Children abused by foster parents and adopting parents
3 Deliberately inflicted physical and sexual abuse of those in care
a Vicarious liability for deliberately inflicted physical harm and sexual abuse
b Negligent failure to prevent abuse
c Limitation periods in child abuse cases
d Damages in abuse cases
4 Harm caused by children for whom a public authority is responsible
a Harm caused to adopting and fostering parents
b Harm caused to third parties
5 Registration of care providers
a Harm caused by an unsuitable care provider
b Financial losses caused to care providers
D Appendix
1 Damages awarded in KR v Bryn Alyn Community Ltd
9 Education 423(74)
A Introduction
1 Trends in the law
2 Structure and content of this chapter
B Accidents, Health, and Physical Safety of Pupils
1 Duty of care
a Introduction
b Accidents on school premises outside regular school hours
c Injuries suffered by pupils while not under the care of the school
2 Standard of care
a Overly rigorous scrutiny by the courts inappropriate
b Reasonable levels of supervision
c Reasonable parent or reasonable educator?
d Does the Balm test apply to health and safety at school?
e Determining the standard of care in specific situations
f Failure to follow guidance
3 Causation and damages
4 Vicarious liability
a Vicarious liability and unauthorized acts
b Direct and vicarious liability
5 Specific instances of physical injury suffered at school
a Injuries sustained during supervised activity in school
b Injuries sustained playing sports
c Injuries sustained in the playground during break-time
d Injuries sustained at school before or after the school day
e Injuries sustained during off-site activities organized by the school
f Injuries sustained in transportation of pupils to and from school
g Injury to children escaping school premises
C Educational Negligence
1 Nature of duty of care
2 Educational professionals who owe duties of care
a Educational psychologists
b Classroom teachers and head-teachers
c Education officers
3 Liability for poor quality of teaching
4 Standard of care
5 Causation
a Application of 'but for'/greater than 50 per cent chance test
b Nature of 'different outcome' that must be established
6 Damages and the nature of injury suffered in educational negligence claims
a Failure to ameliorate a congenital learning difficulty
b Psychological harm
c Is educational harm a form of personal injury or an economic loss or a separate category of injury?
7 Assessment of quantum
a Non-pecuniary losses
b Pecuniary losses
c Alternative approach: awarding a fixed sum in damages
8 Vicarious and direct liability
9 Limitation period
a Applicable limitation period
b Date of knowledge in educational negligence claims
c Discretionary extension of limitation period
10 Costs and importance of identifying negligence precisely
D Bullying
1 Introduction
2 Statutory framework
3 Duty of care
a Is there a duty to prevent bullying which occurs out of school?
4 Was the claimant a victim of bullying?
5 Standard of care
a Bolam test
b Failure to follow guidance on bullying
6 Causation
7 Damages
E Assaults on, and by, Staff at School
10 Police 497(76)
A Introduction
B General Principles
1 Vicarious liability
a Statutory provision
b Vicarious liability for unauthorized acts
2 Duty of care
a Distinguishing between cases in which the Caparo tripartite test does and does not apply
b Proximity
c Policy considerations
C Specific Instances of Police Negligence
1 Harm caused directly by the police
a Negligent driving
b Discharge of firearms and similar devices
c Damage caused during a search of premises
d Other examples
2 Failure to deal with hazards created by third parties
a Pure failure to deal with a hazard
b Taking responsibility for a hazard
3 Failure to prevent crime
a Overview of current law
b Unknown members of the public as victims
c Police officers as victims of crime
d Victim known to be at particular risk
e Presence of police officers at the scene of a crime
f Police informants as victims of crime
g Police in position of control over third party
4 Liability to victims and witnesses for manner in which crime is investigated
a General exclusion of liability
b Provision of counselling and support
c Failure to protect victim from harassment
d Investigation not intended to lead to conviction
5 Liability to suspects for manner in which crime is investigated and prosecuted
a General exclusion of liability
b Investigation for the purpose of the prosecution of the claimant
c Police disciplinary investigations
d Disclosure of allegations of criminal misconduct
e Circumstances in which a duty may be owed to suspects
6 Individuals injured while attempting to evade arrest
7 Liability to representatives of suspects
a Psychiatric harm
b Protection from physical injury
c Economic losses
8 Property damage
a Property not properly protected by the police
b Removal of vehicles
c Property used in the investigation of crime
9 Claims brought by police officers
a Personal injury
b Economic loss
10 Liability arising from detention and the provision of emergency services
11 Detention 573(30)
A Introduction
B Liability to Individuals Harmed While in Detention
1 Introduction
2 Detainees accidentally injured
3 Detainees injured by others in detention
a Duty of care
b Standard of care and causation
4 Liability for suicide or self-harm of detainees
a Knowledge of suicide risk
b Reasonable steps to prevent suicide
c Significance of suicidal prisoner being of sound mind
d Individuals injuring themselves while attempting to escape detention
C Detainees Harmed by Decision to Release Them from Custody
1 Detainee at physical risk
2 Released detainee at risk of other forms of harm: the Clunis case
a Duty of care
b Ex turpi causa
D Liability for Failure to Release an Individual from Custody
1 Article 5 and claims for false imprisonment
2 Negligence claims
a Is there any continuing role for negligence claims?
b When will a duty of care be owed?
E Crimes Committed by Individuals Escaping or Released From Custody
1 Harm caused during course of escape
2 Harm caused to unknown members of the public
3 Cases lying between the Dorset Yacht and the Palmer and K cases
12 Emergency Services 603(28)
A Introduction
B Matters of General Application
1 Justiciability
2 Duty of care
a Physical harm inflicted by a direct and positive act
b Failure to prevent harm
3 Standard of care
a Application of the Bo/am test
b The standard of care when responding to an emergency
C Liability of the Different Emergency Services
1 Fire services
a Introduction
b Proximity
c Liability for non-fire fighting functions
d Policy considerations
e Breach of statutory duty
2 Coast-guards
a Introduction
b Proximity
c Policy considerations
3 Police
a Failure to prevent harm
b Positive creation of danger
4 Ambulance service
a Failure to respond to an emergency call
D Current Law on Emergency Services and Areas of Difficulty
1 Should the Kent case be applied to coast-guards?
2 The effect of the Barrett, Phelps, Gorringe, and Michael cases on emergency services
3 Third parties ceasing rescue because of involvement of emergency services
13 Health and Safety Regulators 631(50)
A Introduction
1 Definitions and sources of regulators' powers
2 The nature of regulation
B General Principles: Duty of Care
1 The Caparo test
2 Application of the Caparo test: directly and indirectly inflicted physical damage
3 The elements of the Caparo test
a Proximity/Assumption of responsibility
b Public policy
4 Liability for pure economic losses
a Requirements for imposing liability
b Purchase of unsafe property
c Commercial interests affected by regulation
d Negligent misstatement made by regulatory authority
C Specific Areas of Regulation
1 Transport
a Introduction
b The regulatory framework
c Physical damage to property or persons
d Economic losses
2 Building regulators
a The regulatory framework
b Economic losses caused to purchasers of defective premises
c Physical damage to person or property
3 Safety regulation of commercial premises and machinery
a The regulatory framework
b Physical damage to persons or property
c Economic losses
4 Animals
a The regulatory framework
b Economic losses
c Physical damage to persons or property
5 Sports regulators
a The regulatory framework
b Facilities and safety equipment
c Formulation of rules of a sport
6 Social services
14 Planning, Environmental, Banking, and Professional Regulation 681(32)
A Introduction
B Planning Authorities
1 The regulatory framework
2 Types of negligence claim brought against planning authorities
3 Property damage and personal injury
a Third party primarily responsible for property damage or personal injury
b Planning authority itself responsible for creating source of danger
4 Economic losses occasioned by determination of planning permission or issuing of enforcement notice
5 Economic losses occasioned by negligent advice given by planning authorities
a Assumption of responsibility
b Reasonable reliance
c Establishing liability
C Environmental Authorities
1 Introduction
2 The regulatory framework
3 Personal injury and damage to property
a Danger created by regulatory authority
b Failure to control a third party
4 Economic losses
D Banking Regulators
1 The regulatory framework
2 Liability in tort
a Claims in negligence against financial regulators
b Misfeasance in public office
E Bodies Regulating Professions
1 Introduction
2 Economic losses
a Professionals harmed by investigation or disciplinary action
b Claims brought by members of public
3 Physical harm
a Failure to investigate or discipline dangerous practitioners
b Failure to provide general warnings and advice to practitioners
15 Highways 713(44)
A Introduction
1 The Highways Act 1980
2 Historical development
B Breach of Statutory Duty: Highways Act 1980, s 41
1 Nature of the duty
a Meaning of 'maintain' the highway
b Injury caused by defects in the highway
c Injury must be physical
2 Standard of care and the statutory defence
a Maintaining the highway free from danger
b Statutory defence
c Standard of care and accumulation of ice and snow
C Common Law Claims: General Principles
1 Relationship between breach of statutory duty and common law claims
2 Duty of care
a The decision in Gorringe and the distinction between acts and omissions
b Precluded pure omissions cases
c Liability for acts
3 Standard of care
a Taking account of dangerous drivers
b Application of the Bolam test
c Resources
D Specific Instances of Common Law Negligence Claims
1 Construction of roads
a Highway barriers
b Other dangers in the construction of roads
c Policy considerations and road construction
2 Street lighting
a Street light itself posing physical hazard
b Positioning of street lighting misleading motorists
c Failure to exercise power to light the highway
3 Road signs and other 'street furniture'
a Road signs or other street furniture itself posing physical hazard
b Road signs misleading motorists
c Failure to exercise power to provide signs
4 Failure to deal with accumulation of ice, snow, water, or other transient defects on the highway
a Claims by road users
b Claims by adjoining landowners
5 Obstructions to visibility on the highway
16 Housing and Land Use 757(38)
A Introduction
B Other Causes of Action Available to Claimants
1 Nuisance
a Elements of the tort
b Defence of statutory authority
2 Rylands v Fletcher
a Non-natural usage
C Careless Performance of Statutory Housing Functions
1 Homelessness
a Breach of statutory duty
b Negligence claims
2 'Right-to-buy' legislation
a Negligent valuation
b Negligent failure to disclose defects
c Denial by local authority of 'right to buy'
3 Negligence in allocation of social housing
D Liability for Misbehaviour of Third Parties
1 Justiciability of claim
2 The distinction between tenants and licensees/trespassers
3 Liability for the misbehaviour of tenants
a Claims in nuisance
b Claims in negligence
c Derogation from grant
4 Liability for the misbehaviour of licensees/trespassers
a Interference with enjoyment of land
b Interference arising from 'use' of the defendant's land
c Nuisance 'continued' or 'adopted' by the local authority
d Evidence needed to establish that nuisance was continued or adopted
e Is mere knowledge of a nuisance always sufficient?
5 Criticism of the distinction between tenants and licensees/trespassers
E Environmental Harm
1 Acts and omissions
2 Sewerage
a Failure to build or improve sewers
b Operational failure and acts not covered by statutory scheme
c Nuisance created by positive act of sewerage undertaker
3 Noise and pollution from other sources
a Public authority acting pursuant to statutory scheme
b Public authority not acting pursuant to statutory scheme
c Land used in the public interest
d Environmental hazards not arising from 'use' of defendant's land
17 Armed Forces 795(22)
A Introduction
B Injuries Suffered before 1987: Statutory Immunity and the Crown Proceedings Act 1947, s 10
1 Time and place of injury
2 Limitation periods
3 Crown immunity and Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights
C Suspension of Statutory Immunity
D Combat Immunity
1 Rationale for combat immunity
2 Combat immunity and the identity of the claimant
a Acts of State
E Specific Examples of Claims Against the Armed Forces
1 Active engagement with the enemy
2 Careless planning of military operations
3 Peacekeeping and policing operations carried out by Armed Forces
4 Injuries sustained during training
5 Injuries unconnected to combat
a Vicarious liability
6 Pure economic losses suffered by members of the Armed Forces
a Disputes as to terms of service
b Negligent misstatement
18 Miscellaneous Public Authority Functions 817(22)
A Health Warnings and Health Policy
1 Introduction
2 Health information and warnings
a Failure to provide health warnings
b Provision of misleading health information
3 Health policy
4 Licensing of drugs
a Failure to withdraw unsafe drugs
b Economic losses to drugs manufacturers
B Provision of Social Security Benefits and Enforcement of Child Maintenance
1 Introduction
C Other Aspects of Public Administration
1 Land registry
2 Provision of information concerning land ownership
3 Information provided by courts
4 Companies House
5 Immigration advice and decisions
6 Taxation advice and decisions
7 Ministerial decisions
Index 839
Duncan Fairgreive is Senior Fellow in Comparative Law at the British Institute of International and Comparative Law, London, and Professor of Comparative Law at Université Paris Dauphine PSL. He is also a barrister practising from 1 Crown Office Row, London.

Dan Squires QC is a barrister at Matrix Chambers, specializing in public and human rights law and has been appointed Deputy High Court Judge. His practice encompasses a wide range of areas including community care, education prison law, privacy, terrorism, regulatory bodies and general issues relating to fair trial rights. He has published many articles in the areas of his specialism and is a Visiting Professor at Queen Mary University of London.