BEGIN:VCALENDAR
VERSION:2.0
PRODID:-//Law School: Events - ECPv6.15.20//NONSGML v1.0//EN
CALSCALE:GREGORIAN
METHOD:PUBLISH
X-ORIGINAL-URL:https://law-events.sydney.edu.au
X-WR-CALDESC:Events for Law School: Events
REFRESH-INTERVAL;VALUE=DURATION:PT1H
X-Robots-Tag:noindex
X-PUBLISHED-TTL:PT1H
BEGIN:VTIMEZONE
TZID:Australia/Sydney
BEGIN:STANDARD
TZOFFSETFROM:+1100
TZOFFSETTO:+1000
TZNAME:AEST
DTSTART:20220402T160000
END:STANDARD
BEGIN:DAYLIGHT
TZOFFSETFROM:+1000
TZOFFSETTO:+1100
TZNAME:AEDT
DTSTART:20221001T160000
END:DAYLIGHT
BEGIN:STANDARD
TZOFFSETFROM:+1100
TZOFFSETTO:+1000
TZNAME:AEST
DTSTART:20230401T160000
END:STANDARD
BEGIN:DAYLIGHT
TZOFFSETFROM:+1000
TZOFFSETTO:+1100
TZNAME:AEDT
DTSTART:20230930T160000
END:DAYLIGHT
BEGIN:STANDARD
TZOFFSETFROM:+1100
TZOFFSETTO:+1000
TZNAME:AEST
DTSTART:20240406T160000
END:STANDARD
BEGIN:DAYLIGHT
TZOFFSETFROM:+1000
TZOFFSETTO:+1100
TZNAME:AEDT
DTSTART:20241005T160000
END:DAYLIGHT
END:VTIMEZONE
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Australia/Sydney:20230601T180000
DTEND;TZID=Australia/Sydney:20230601T193000
DTSTAMP:20260419T133516
CREATED:20240912T235842Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20240913T010818Z
UID:1641-1685642400-1685647800@law-events.sydney.edu.au
SUMMARY:Unpicking torts: Elements\, standing requirements and conditions of actionability
DESCRIPTION:Unpicking torts: Elements\, standing requirements and conditions of actionability\nIn-person event\n  \nThere is a fashion for thinking about torts in terms of recipes: as causes of action made up of a fixed set of ingredients. It is fashion that has adherents in both judicial and juristic circles. Typically\, the things that a plaintiff must demonstrate in order to sue in tort are referred to as ‘elements’ of a tort. But sometimes one comes across talk of the plaintiff’s need to satisfy either a ‘condition of actionability’ or a ‘standing requirement’. \nThis change in language when referring to what the plaintiff must show is ostensibly perplexing. It naturally raises the following questions: (1) how\, do the three concepts come apart\, and (2) what significance can be attached to any differences between them? These are the questions with which this paper wrestles. \nThe first contention advanced in the paper is this: while elements and conditions of actionability are in fact discrete juridical entities\, standing requirements are not. The second is that recognising the difference possesses considerable practical and theoretical significance. \nAbout the speaker:\nProfessor John Murphy (The University of Hong Kong) \nJohn Murphy is a Professor at the Faculty of Law\, The University of Hong Kong. He was educated in England and holds undergraduate and postgraduate degrees in law. John specialises in the law of torts\, and he has authored two monographs in the field: The Law of Nuisance (Oxford University Press\, 2010) and The Province and Politics of the Economic Torts (Hart Publishing\, 2022). For over a decade he was the editor of Street on Torts \, and for even longer he has been one of small group of editors responsible for the production of Clerk and Lindsell on Torts\, the leading practitioner work on tort law. \nCommentator: Professor Peter Cane (Sydney Law School) \nThursday 1 June 2023\nTime: 6-7.30pm AEST (Seminar from 6-7pm\, with refreshments served afterwards) \nVenue: Level 4\, Common Room\, New Law Building (F10)\, Eastern Avenue\, Camperdown campus \nCPD Points: 1 \n  \nThis event is proudly presented by Sydney Law School at The University of Sydney.
URL:https://law-events.sydney.edu.au/event/unpicking-torts-elements-standing-requirements-and-conditions-of-actionability/
LOCATION:Common Room\, Level 4\, Sydney Law School
CATEGORIES:CPD eligible events
END:VEVENT
END:VCALENDAR