Restitution
front page

What's new?

Archive front page

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2007

2006

2008

2009

In response to Ben's posting, classification of rules of law rarely has direct practical consequences, hence the traditional aversion to academic analyses shown by practitioners in the Common Law world. This does not mean that attempts to classify rules of law are futile. Classification enhances our understanding of the law, pushes us to draw analogies and comparisons between different rules and ultimately hopefully contributes to developments in the law which lead to a more coherent and logical legal system. The law is a tool of practice but that does not mean that any exercise devoid of direct practical consequences is a waste of time.

With respect to Lord Archer's case, it matters little from a practical point of view whether we say that repayment of the damages is an obvious consequence of setting the judgment aside or an application of the law of restitution (change of position is surely not open where the reason for setting the judgment aside makes it impossible to say that JA acted in good faith...). However, the debate is useful in that it contributes to our understanding of how the legal system works. Surely that is reason enough.

Matthew Scully.
Oxford Institute of Legal Practice.