Hukum Lingkungan dan Pertanggungjawaban Strict Liability dalam Sistem Hukum Common Law (Studi Kasus Cambridge Water Co. Ltd v. Eastern Countries Leather Plc)
Abstract
ABSTRACT: The possibilities for pollution control still offered today Blackburn J.’s celebrated rule of strict liability, now almost 130 years old, has ensured its continuing popularity. There can be few tort lawyers, however, who have not increasingly wondered how much time should be devoted to a case which has received little judicial attention in recent years, and which was last subjected to detailed consideration by the House of Lords nearly 50 years ago, until, that is, the much-published decision of the House of Lords in Cambridge Water Co. Ltd v. Eastern Countries Leather Plc.
(Environmental Law and The Strict Liability Application In the Common Law System) (The Case Study of Cambridge Water Co. Ltd V. Eastern Countries Leather Plc)
Keywords
Full Text:
PDFReferences
M. Mullender dan L. Dolding, Environmental Law: notions of Strict Liability, Journal of Business Law, volume 1995.
Newark, The Boundaries of Nuisance, 1949, Volume. 65 L.Q.R.
Winfield dan Jolowicz, On Tort, 1993, Cotton Law Journal, volume 13.
Peraturan Perundang-undangan
A Directive from Brussels, even Siller and Stupider than most, Weir, 1993, C.L.J.
Departement of Environmental Circular the United Kingdom 20/82
Kasus
Burnie Port Authority v. General Jones Pty. Ltd, 1994, Australian Law Journal.
Cambridge Water Co. Ltd v. Eastern Counties Leather Plc, 1994, Volume 2 Appeal of Court.
Overseas Tankship (U.K.) Ltd v. Morts Dock and Engineering Co. Ltd, 1961, Appeal Court.
Overseas Tankship (U.K.) Ltd v.Miller Steamship Co. Pty., 1967, Appeal Court.
Rylands v. Fletcher, 1866, Law Review Journal Volume 1.
Shutherland Shire Council v. Heyman, 1985, Volume 60. Australia Law Journal.
Article Metrics
Abstract view : 0 timesPDF - 0 times
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.








