Cultural advice

The Australian National University acknowledges, celebrates and pays our respects to the Ngunnawal and Ngambri people of the Canberra region and to all First Nations Australians on whose traditional lands we meet and work, and whose cultures are among the oldest continuing cultures in human history.

Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples are advised that ANU Library collections may include images, names, voices, and other representations of deceased persons.

Material in the collection may contain terms, language or views that reflect the period in which the item was created and may be considered inappropriate today.

The Tort liability of public authorities: a comparative analysis

Loading...
Thumbnail Image

Date

Authors

Cane, Peter

Journal Title

Journal ISSN

Volume Title

Publisher

Hart Publishing

Abstract

The aim of this chapter is to explore, and offer an explanation of, a striking difference between US law, on the one hand, and English and Australian law, on the other, in relation to the tort liability of public authorities, namely, the central role of the concept of ‘ sovereign immunity ’ in US law as compared with English and Australian law. The proffered explanation is in terms of a distinction between two models of the tort liability of public authorities, namely, a private law model and a public law model. To explain this distinction it is necessary, fi rst, to contrast pure and hybrid versions of these two models.

Description

Keywords

Citation

Source

Book Title

The common law of obligations: divergence and unity

Entity type

Access Statement

License Rights

Restricted until

2099-12-31
abcd