Advertisement

§ 7 Reception of the DCFR’s Concept of “Legally Relevant Damage” and Its Potential for the Protection of Pure Economic Interests

Chapter
  • 244 Downloads

Abstract

The contents of the DCFR comply with the scheme set out by the European Commission, which asked for the development of a uniform European legal terminology. Indeed, the DCFR includes a list of definitions which are part of the “toolbox” function and serve as suggestions for European legislators.

Bibliography

  1. Almeida Costa MJ (2006a) Direito das Obrigações, 10th edn. Almedina, CoimbraGoogle Scholar
  2. Alpa G, Bessone M, Zeno-Zencovich V (1995) I fatti illeciti. In: Rescigno R (ed) Trattato di diritto privato, vol XIV. Utet, TurinGoogle Scholar
  3. Antunes Varela J (2000) Das obrigações em geral, vol 1, 10th edn. Almedina, CoimbraGoogle Scholar
  4. Araújo Dias CM (2010) O crédito pela compensação do trabalho doméstico prestado na constância do matrimónio (a contribuição consideravelmente superior de um dos cônjuges para os encargos da vida familiar - O art. 1676 do Código Civil). In: Sottomayor M C, Féria de Almeida M T (coords) E foram felizes para sempre? Uma análise crítica do novo regime jurídico do divórcio. Wolters Kluwer/Coimbra Editora, Coimbra, pp 199–226Google Scholar
  5. Banakas EK (1996) Tender is the night: economic loss - the issues. In: Banakas EK (ed) Civil liability for pure economic loss. Kluwer Law International, London, pp 1–25Google Scholar
  6. Blackie J (2005) Tort/Delict in the work of the European Civil Code project of the study group on a European civil code. In: Zimmermann R (ed) Grundstrukturen eines Europäischen Bereicherungsrechts. Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, pp 133–146Google Scholar
  7. Blackie J (2007) The torts provisions of the Study Group on a European Civil Code. In: Bussani M (ed) European tort law. Eastern and western perspectives, European private law 5. Stämpfli, Bern, pp 55–80Google Scholar
  8. Brüggemeier G (2009a) Non-contractual liability arising out of damage caused to another: the making of a hybrid. In: Somma A (ed) The politics of the Draft Common Frame of Reference, pp 179–198. Kluwer Law International, The HagueGoogle Scholar
  9. Carneiro da Frada MA (1997) Uma “terceira via” no Direito da responsabilidade civil? O problema da imputação dos danos causados a terceiros por auditores de sociedades. Almedina, CoimbraGoogle Scholar
  10. Carneiro da Frada MA (2006) Direito Civil, responsabilidade civil: O método do caso. Almedina, CoimbraGoogle Scholar
  11. Castronovo C (2006) La nuova responsabilità civile, 3rd edn. Giuffrè, MilanGoogle Scholar
  12. Cian G (1966) Antigiuridicità e colpevolezza: saggio per una teoria dell’illecito civile. CEDAM, PaduaGoogle Scholar
  13. Claeys I (2012) The draft tort rules of the DCFR: a Belgian law perspective. In: Sagaert V, Storme M, Terryn E (eds) The Draft Common Frame of Reference: national and comparative perspectives. Intersentia, Cambridge/Antwerp/Portland, pp 231–239Google Scholar
  14. Coelho dos Santos J (1994) A reparação civil do dano corporal: reflexão jurídica sobre a perícia médico-legal e o dano dor. RPDC 3(4):73–90Google Scholar
  15. De Cupis A (1979) Il Danno. Teoria generale della responsabilità civile. Giuffrè, MilanGoogle Scholar
  16. Deutsch E (1976) Haftungsrecht, vol I-Allgemeine Lehren. Carl Heymanns, Cologne/Berlin/Bonn/MunichGoogle Scholar
  17. Eidenmüller H, Faust F, Grigoleit HC, Jansen N, Wagner G, Zimmermann R (2008a) The common frame of reference for European private law - Policy choices and codification problems. OJLS 28(1):659–708Google Scholar
  18. Eidenmüller H, Faust F, Grigoleit HC, Jansen N, Wagner G, Zimmermann R (2008b) Ungesteuerte Richtermacht; ist die Zeit schon reif für ein europäisches Zivilgesetzbuch? Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, 5 June 2008Google Scholar
  19. Escher-Weingart C (1993) Nutzungsausfall als Schaden und sein Ersatz. Lang, Frankfurt am MainGoogle Scholar
  20. Frank R (1979) Die Schutzobjekte des § 823 Abs. 1 BGB und ihre Bedeutung für die Systematik der Deliktstatbestände. JA 11(10):583–590Google Scholar
  21. Franzoni M (1993) Fatti illeciti. In: Galgano F (ed) Commentario del Codice Civile Scialoja-Branca, libro IV: Obbligazioni, Arts. 2043–2059. Zanichelli, Il foro Italiano, Bologna/RomaGoogle Scholar
  22. Gordley J (2003) The rule against recovery in negligence for pure economic loss: an historical accident? In: Bussani M, Palmer VV (eds) Pure economic loss in Europe. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 25–56CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Gozzi C (2006) Der Anspruch iure proprio auf Ersatz des Nichtvermögensschadens wegen der Tötung eines nahen Angehörigen in Deutschland und Italien. V&R Unipress, GöttingenGoogle Scholar
  24. Hohloch G (1981) Allgemeines Schadensrecht: Empfiehlt sich eine Neufassung der gesetztlichen Regelung des Schadensrechts (§§ 249-255 BGB)? In: Bundesminister der Justiz, Gutachten und Vorschläge zur Überarbeitung des Schuldrechts, vol 1. Bundesanzeiger, Cologne, pp 375–478Google Scholar
  25. Hollander W (2012) Tort law and the violation of statutory provisions. In: Sagaert V, Storme ME, Terryn E (eds) The Draft Common Frame of Reference: national and comparative perspectives. Intersentia, Cambridge/Antwerp/Portland, pp 241–260Google Scholar
  26. Howarth D (2011) The general conditions of unlawfulness. In: Hartkamp A, Hesselink MW, Hondius EH, Mak C, du Perron CE (eds) Towards a European civil code, 4th edn. Kluwer Law International/Ars Aequi Libri, Alphen aan den Rijn, pp 845–887Google Scholar
  27. Kötz H, Wagner G (2013) Deliktsrecht, 12th edn. Vahlen, MunichGoogle Scholar
  28. Koziol H (2004) Compensation for pure economic loss from a continental lawyer’s perspective. In: van Boom WH, Koziol H, Witting CA (eds), Bloch B (contrib.) Pure economic loss, tort and insurance law, vol 9. Springer, Vienna, pp 141–161Google Scholar
  29. Koziol H (2006) Recovery for economic loss in the European Union. Ariz Law Rev 48(4):871–895Google Scholar
  30. Koziol H (2009) Außervertragliche Schuldverhältnisse im CFR. In: Schmidt-Kessel M (ed) Der Gemeinsame Referenzrahmen. Entstehung, Inhalte, Anwendung. Sellier, Munich, pp 93–112Google Scholar
  31. Lange H, Schiemann G (2003) Schadensersatz. In: Gernhuber J (ed) Handbuch des Schuldrechts, 3rd edn. Mohr Siebeck, TübingenGoogle Scholar
  32. Larenz K (1987) Lehrbuch des Schuldrechts, vol I-Allgemeiner Teil, 14th edn. Beck, MunichGoogle Scholar
  33. Leite de Campos D (1987) A vida, a morte e a sua indemnização. BolMinJus 365(1):5–20Google Scholar
  34. Lipstein K (1963) Protected interests in the law of torts. CLJ 21(1):85–103CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Magnus U (2001a) Comparative report on the law of damages. In: Magnus U (ed) Unification of tort law: damages. Kluwer Law International, The Hague/London/New York, pp 185–217Google Scholar
  36. Magnus U (2001b) Damages under German law. In: Magnus U (ed) Unification of tort law: damages. Kluwer Law International, The Hague/London/New York, pp 89–107Google Scholar
  37. Magnus U (2004b) Vergleich der Vorschläge zum europäischen Deliktsrecht. ZEuP (3):562–580Google Scholar
  38. Menezes Cordeiro A (2010b) Tratado de Direito Civil Português, vol II-Direito das Obrigações. Tomo 3-Gestão de negócios, enriquecimento sem causa, responsabilidade civil. Almedina, CoimbraGoogle Scholar
  39. Menezes Leitão LM (2013) Direito das Obrigações, vol 1, 10th edn. Almedina, CoimbraGoogle Scholar
  40. Miranda Barbosa M (2015) Responsabilidade Civil: Um diálogo a propósito da ilicitude e da causalidade adequada entre o sistema Português e a tentativa de harmonização do direito delitual ao nível Europeu. TI 33(1):218–264Google Scholar
  41. Mommsen F (1855) Zur Lehre von dem Interesse. Schwetschke, BraunschweigGoogle Scholar
  42. Oliphant K (2011) Volume 4 (Book VI, Non-Contractual Liability Arising out of Damage Caused to Another). Edinburgh Law Rev 16(1):309–311Google Scholar
  43. Pinkel T (2008) Das Buch VI des Entwurfs eines Gemeinsamen Referenzrahmens (DCFR): Nichtvertragliche Schuldverhälnisse aus Schädigung Dritter. Eine kritische Analyse des Modellgesetzes eines europäischen Deliktsrechts. ZERP-Diskussionspapier 6/2008. ZERP, BremenGoogle Scholar
  44. Pires de Lima FA, Antunes Varela JM (1987) Código Civil anotado, vol 1. Coimbra Editora, CoimbraGoogle Scholar
  45. Ranieri F (2003) Europäisches Obligationenrecht. Springer, ViennaGoogle Scholar
  46. Rodotà S (1964) Il problema della responsabilità civile. Giuffrè, MilanoGoogle Scholar
  47. Rudden B (1991–1992) Torticles. TulCivLaw Forum 6/7(105):105–129Google Scholar
  48. Sacco R (1960) L’ingiustizia del danno di cui all’art. 2043 cc. Foro pad. I:1420–1442Google Scholar
  49. Schlechtriem P (1997) Schadensersatz und Schadensbegriff. ZEup 2:232–254Google Scholar
  50. Schlesinger P (1960) L’ingiustizia del danno nell’illecito civile. JuS:336–347Google Scholar
  51. Schmidt-Kessel M (2006) Reform des Schadensersatzrechts, vol I-Europäische Vorgaben und Vorbilder. Manz, ViennaGoogle Scholar
  52. Schulze R (2012) Non-contractual liability arising out of damage caused to another in the DCFR. In: Sagaert V, Storme M, Terryn E (eds) The Draft Common Frame of Reference: national and comparative perspectives. Intersentia, Cambridge/Antwerp/Portland, pp 221–230Google Scholar
  53. Sinde Monteiro JF (2007) Responsabilidade delitual. Da ilicitude. In Aa. Vv. Comemorações dos 35 anos do Código Civil e dos 25 anos da Reforma de 1977, vol III-Direito das Obrigações. Coimbra Editora, Coimbra, pp 453–481Google Scholar
  54. Sinde Monteiro JF, Veloso MM (2001) Portugal. In: Faure M, Koziol H (eds) Cases on medical malpractice in a comparative perspective. Springer, Vienna/New York, pp 172–187Google Scholar
  55. Stoll H (1984) Richterliche Fortbildung und gesetzliche Überarbeitung des Deliktsrechts. Müller, HeidelbergGoogle Scholar
  56. Swann S (2003) Conceptual foundations of the law of delict as proposed by the Study Group on a European Civil Code. InDret 130:1–31Google Scholar
  57. Trimarchi P (2007) Istituzioni di diritto privato, 17th edn. Giuffrè, MilanGoogle Scholar
  58. van Boom WH, Koziol H, Witting CA (2004a) Outlook. In: van Boom WH, Koziol H, Witting CA (eds) Bloch B (contrib.) Pure economic loss, tort and insurance law, vol 9. Springer, Vienna, pp 191–205Google Scholar
  59. Volens U (2010) Expert’s liability to a third person at the point of intersection of the law of contract and the law of delict. JI 17(1):176–187Google Scholar
  60. von Bar C (1994b) Liability for information and opinions causing pure economic loss to third parties: a comparison of English and German case law. In: Markesinis BS (ed) The gradual convergence. Foreign ideas, foreign influences, and English law on the eve of the 21st century. Clarendon Press, Oxford, pp 98–127Google Scholar
  61. von Bar C (1996a) A common European law of torts. Centro di Studi e Ricerche di Diritto Comparato e Straniero, RomeGoogle Scholar
  62. von Bar C (1999a) Außervertragliche Schuldverhältnisse, insbesondere Haftungsrecht. In: von Bar C, Barendrecht M, Basedow J, Drobnig U, van Gerven W, Hondius E, Kerameus K, Koussoulis S, Lando O, Loos M, Tilmann W (eds) (1999) Untersuchung der Privatrechtsordnungen der EU im Hinblick auf Diskriminierungen und die Schaffung eines europäisches Zivilgesetzbuches. Europäisches Parlament, Luxembourg. Available via the European Parliament website. http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/etudes/join/1999/168511/IPOL-JURI_ET%281999%29168511_DE.pdf. Accessed 31 March 2017
  63. von Bar C (1999b) Damage without loss. In: Swadling W, Jones G (eds) The search for principle. Essays in honour of Lord Goff of Chieveley. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 23–43Google Scholar
  64. von Bar C (1999c) Das deutsche Deliktsrecht in gemeineuropäischer Perspektive. Müller, HeidelbergGoogle Scholar
  65. von Bar C (1999f) Non-contractual obligations, especially the law of tort. In: Offermann KH (ed) The private law systems in the EU. Discrimination on grounds of nationality and the need for a European Civil Code. European Parliament, Luxembourg, pp 41–55Google Scholar
  66. von Bar C (2000b) Moderne Deliktsrechtspflege in den Zwängen einer wilhelminischen Kodifikation. In: Canaris CW, Heldrich A (eds) 50 Jahre Bundesgerichtshof. Beck, MunichGoogle Scholar
  67. von Bar C (2001a) Konturen des Deliktsrechtskonzeptes der Study Group on a European Civil Code. Ein Werkstattbericht. ZEuP (9):515–532Google Scholar
  68. von Bar C (2002a) Auf dem Wege zu Europäischen Grundregeln der außervertraglichen Schadenshaftung. In: Schlechtriem P (ed) Wandlungen des Schuldrechts, pp 165–178. Nomos, Baden-BadenGoogle Scholar
  69. von Bar C (2002b) On drafting principles of tortious liability. In: Barrett G, Bernardeau L (eds) Towards a European civil code: reflections on the codification of civil law in Europe, pp 67–74. ERA Forum, TrierGoogle Scholar
  70. von Bar C (2008c) Non-contractual liability arising out of damage caused to another under the DCFR. ERA Forum 9(1):33–38Google Scholar
  71. von Bar C (ed) (2009c) Principles of European law on Non-Contractual Liability Arising Out of Damage Caused to Another. PEL Liab. Dam. Sellier, MunichGoogle Scholar
  72. von Bar C (2010a) Außervertragliche Haftung für den Einem Anderen Zugefügten Schaden. Das Buch VI des Draft Common Frame of Reference. ERPL 18(2):205–225Google Scholar
  73. von Bar C (2011b) The notion of damage. In: Hartkamp AS, Hesselink MW, Hondius EH, Mak C, du Perron CE (eds) Towards a European civil code, 4th edn. Kluwer Law International, Alphen aan den Rijn, pp 387–399Google Scholar
  74. von Bar C, Clive E, Schulte-Nölke H, Beale H, Herre J, Huet J, Storme M, Swann S, Varul P, Veneziano A, Zoll F (eds) (2008) Principles, definitions and model rules of European private law: draft common frame of reference (Interim Outline Edition). Sellier, MunichGoogle Scholar
  75. von Bar C, Drobnig U (2004) The interaction of contract law and tort and property law in Europe. Sellier, MunichGoogle Scholar
  76. Wagner G (2009) The law of torts in the DCFR. In: Wagner G (ed) The Common Frame of Reference: a view from law & economics. Sellier, Munich, pp 225–272Google Scholar
  77. Weir T (1999) Book review of unification of tort law: wrongfulness. CLJ 58(3):643–645Google Scholar
  78. Winiger B, Koziol H, Koch B A, Zimmermann R (eds) (2011) Digest of European tort law. Essential cases on damage, vol 2. De Gruyter, Berlin/BostonGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of LawUniversity of OsnabrückOsnabrückGermany

Personalised recommendations