If you are experiencing problems downloading PDF or HTML fulltext, our helpdesk recommend clearing your browser cache and trying again. If you need help in clearing your cache, please click here . Still need help? Email email@example.com
This essay has two themes. The violins, so to say, are trying to restate something elementary about the law of personal property. The cello is gently grumbling about the promiscuous use of the word “remedy”. Those who prefer to do so will find it easy to shut the cello out. The two things that the essay seeks to do are these. First, we must understand our law of personal property better, and the starting point is a clearer picture of how our law protects proprietary rights in personality. What follows aims to take a step towards securing that starting point. Secondly, tempting as it is to try to achieve this in terms of “proprietary remedies” or simply “remedies”, that language is so ambiguous that it can make only a negative contribution. And that needs to be shown up. It is dangerous to be unaware that the language of remedy clouds the clearest pool.
Until 2007 the King's Law Journal was known as the King's College Law Journal. It was established in 1990 as a legal periodical publishing scholarly and authoritative Articles, Notes and Reports on legal issues of current importance to both academic research and legal practice. It has a national and international readership, and publishes refereed contributions from authors across the United Kingdom, from continental Europe and further afield (particularly Commonwealth countries and USA). The journal includes a Reviews section containing critical notices of recently published books.