English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Are judges  la bouche de la loi  or are they the oracles of the law? An answer to this question is sought by comparing the different styles of reasoning of French, German, Austrian and UK courts of last resort in tort cases. Whereas UK judges state overtly what they think, French judges keep secret their motives. German and Austrian judges tend to maintain that legal doctrine provides an answer to even the most difficult questions. But, as regards the outcome, there are no real differences. Judges are nowhere merely the mouth of the law.

journal of european tort law

How Judges Think: Judicial Reasoning in Tort Cases from a Comparative Perspective  This article is the revised text of the Opening Lecture given at the 12th Annual Conference on European Tort Law on 6 April 2013.