Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-hc48f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T23:19:28.244Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

REINTERPRETING THE REINTERPRETATION OF THE REINTERPRETATION OF FAIRCHILD

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  30 October 2015

Jonathan Morgan
Get access

Extract

FAIRCHILD v Glenhaven Funeral Services Ltd. [2002] UKHL 22; [2003] 1 A.C. 32 was a hard case that made bad law. Now, for the fourth time, an appeal has gone to the highest tribunal, to unravel Fairchild's resulting complications. International Energy Group Ltd. v Zurich Insurance plc. [2015] UKSC 33; [2015] 2 W.L.R. 1471 (“Zurich”) represents “yet another demanding chapter in [that] difficult series of decisions”: at [189], per Lord Neuberger and Lord Reed. Zurich's resolution took seven judges, in four reasoned judgments, 211 paragraphs, or 80 pages of the law reports – some 46,000 words.

Type
Case and Comment
Information
The Cambridge Law Journal , Volume 74 , Issue 3 , November 2015 , pp. 395 - 398
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge Law Journal and Contributors 2015 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)