This still conflicts theoretically with the principle

Info iconThis preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: n. In contrast, the court's derivative is issued chronologically subsequent to the movement in the underlying asset (the plaintiffs position) and is only generated when the plaintiffs position has deteriorated. The expiry date is analogous to the date judgment is 355 h anded down. A plaintiff never suffers a margin call w h e n the position is s hown to have moved against the plaintiff, unless the burden of costs of the defendant in a losing case can be characterized as a margin call against the plaintiff. This caricature of opportunity cost awards in litigation is an interesting analytical anomaly which may provide further research opportunities in the future. The future directions of courts regarding economic theory is more uncertain. Although the classification dilemma appears to have been reconciled, the common law framework derived from the ancient forms of action still maintains barriers to opportunity cost recovery through both the rules of evidence and rules of law. Plaintiffs must still overcome the onus of proof in both its evidentiary sense and according to the overall proof of the cause of action and losses. The doctrine of remoteness of damages also still limits the recovery of the whole loss a plaintiff incurs in instances where foreseeability tort, or the second limb of the rule in Hadley v Baxendale in contract, is not satisfactoril discharged in the court's eyes. This still conflicts theoretically with the principle of restitutio in integrum. In addition, as the courts seek to refine parameters of recoverable opportunity costs, there is no guarantee that the types of recoverable consequential opportunity losses will increase. Other uncertainties, such as how the courts will seek out and specify the parameters of 'common sense' in dealing with causation issues still exist, with no clear prognostic answers. The tediously slow, case-by-case method of development in common law will not answer quickly questions regarding these legal principles, and the outcomes of cases which involve arguments over the limits which the courts should set upon recoverable opportunity costs will still be subject to arguments by inventive counsel seeking to both limit and enlarge the class of recoverable damages falling into this genre. This has been the same process which the courts of common law 356 h ave endured since surrogate legal practitioners were allowed to partake in the early counting. Although the changes affecting the area of opportunity cost recovery have been far reaching, the resolution mechanism of the courts is still preserved intact. This is the sam model which was outlined in the canons of the Fourth Lateran Council in 1215, which set out the ecclesiastical mandate for jurisdiction, third party adjudication, venues of courts set by distance, and the forsaking of irrational forms of proof. This model has survived through seven centuries of social pressure and conflict. It is uncertain how it will change in the future, for circumstances exist for which there is no prior example or precedent. 357 BIBLIOGRAPHY Abbott, L .W. 1973, Law Reporting in England 1485-1585, Athlone Press, University of L ondon Abulafia, D. 1987, "Asia, Africa, and the Trade of Medieval Europe", in Postman and Miller (eds.) 1987, The Cambridge Economic History of Europe, 2 ed., vol. 2, pp. 40273 Allan, D. E. and Hiscock, M. E. 1992, The Law of Contract in Australia, 2 ed., CCH Australia Anonymous 1987, "Gallery of Church Fathers and Their Thoughts on Wealth", White, Petersen, and Runyon (eds) 1987, Christian History, vol V I, no. 2, pp. 10-11, 35 Anonymous 2001, The Succession List of the Archbishops of Canterbury, online at Anonymous 2002, "Louis Bachelier, 1870-1946" online available at Atiyah, P. S. 1979, The Rise and Fall of Freedom of Contract, Oxford, Clarendon Press Australian Law Reform Commission 1996, Judicial and Case Management, online Baechler, J. 1975, The Origins of Capitalism, 1975 reprint, Oxford, Basil Blackwell Baker, J. H. 1986, The Legal Profession and the Common Law, The Hambledon Press Ballard, B. 1994, "On the Sin of Usury: A Biblical Economic Ethic", Christian Scholar Review, [1994] v olume 24, no. 2, pp. 210-228 Bantilan, C. and Davis, J. 1991, Across-Commodity Spillover Effects of Research and Opportunity Costs in a Multi-Product Production Environment, A C I A R Project Papers, no. 3 0 Barber, W. J. 1967, A History of Economic Thought, Praeger Books Barber, William J. 1968, A History of Economic Thought [reprint] Frederick A. Praeger Publishers N e w York Baron A 2000 "The "Mystery" of Negligence and Economic Loss: When is a Duty of Care O w e d ? " Australian Bar Review vol. 19,14 February 2000; 2 000 A B R Lexis 4 Baskin, J. B. and Miranti, P. J. 1997 A History of Corporate Finance Ca...
View Full Document

This note was uploaded on 09/03/2012 for the course LAW 1501 taught by Professor Garva during the Three '12 term at University of Adelaide.

Ask a homework question - tutors are online