All Outputs (3)

O Tempora! O Mores! The place of boni mores in dignity discourse. (2019)
Journal Article
BROWN, J. 2020. O Tempora! O Mores! The place of boni mores in dignity discourse. Cambridge quarterly of healthcare ethics, 29(1), pages 144-155. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0963180119000872

In an earlier article, I had argued that Common lawyers and bioethicists may find the Romanistic notion of the actio iniuriarum, and the conception of ‘dignity’ which is central to this legal mechanism, instructive in complex medico-legal cases. Prof... Read More about O Tempora! O Mores! The place of boni mores in dignity discourse..

Dignity, body parts and the actio iniuriarum: a novel solution to a common (law) problem? (2019)
Journal Article
BROWN, J. 2019. Dignity, body parts and the actio iniuriarum: a novel solution to a common (law) problem? Cambridge quarterly of healthcare ethics [online], 28(3), pages 522-533. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0963180119000446

The importance of human 'dignity' in disputes concerning biological material has been recognised, but the term 'dignity' itself is oft decried as a 'hopelessly amorphous', 'vacuous concept' which should be 'discarded as a potential foundation for rig... Read More about Dignity, body parts and the actio iniuriarum: a novel solution to a common (law) problem?.

Jus quaesitum tertio: a res, not a right? (2019)
Journal Article
BROWN, J. 2019. Jus quaesitum tertio: a res, not a right? Juridical review [online], 1, pages 53-74. Available from: http://westlaw.co.uk(accepted).

Until the law was reformed by the Contract (Third Party Rights) (Scotland) Act 2017, the law relating to contractual third party rights, in Scotland, was perceived to be problematic. There were thought to be three main problems: Firstly, such a right... Read More about Jus quaesitum tertio: a res, not a right?.