Common Law Retrospectivity
Andrew Burrows
Abstract
Andrew Burrows
Abstract
This chapter focuses on two areas, one in civil law (restitution for mistake of law) and the other in criminal law (marital rape), where decisions of the courts have raised especially interesting questions about retrospectivity. Before doing so, however, it first explains that the objections to retrospectivity are not absolute and, secondly, that there is no advantage in abandoning the terminology of retrospectivity.
OpenAlex reports 7 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.
A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
This chapter focuses on two areas, one in civil law (restitution for mistake of law) and the other in criminal law (marital rape), where decisions of the courts have raised especially interesting questions about retrospectivity. Before doing so, however, it first explains that the objections to retrospectivity are not absolute and, secondly, that there is no advantage in abandoning the terminology of retrospectivity.
Key concepts: Law, Political science