Environmental Impairment Liability Research Articles

Compensation for harm caused by nuclear installations: what’s the damage?

PurposeThis paper aims to explain the changes to the liability regime for nuclear installations before reviewing the traditional heads of damage under the 1965 Act. It argues that while there is some welcome clarification of what amounts to an “occurrence” in the purposes of the 1965 Act, disappointingly, little has been done to clarify how concepts of personal injury and property damage under the Act sit alongside traditional tort notions leaving the law highly dependent on earlier, but not always consistent, case law. The paper then goes on to consider the impact of the new categories of compensation, introduced by the Order, evaluating the extent to which these draw upon EU law structures for environmental impairment liability. Again, it questions whether this approach will achieve sufficient clarity and certainty.Design/methodology/approachThis paper is a desk-based legal research.FindingsThis study is a discussion of statutory material and case law.Originality/valueThis paper is a first in-depth treatment of changes to liability principles in the Nuclear Installations Act 1965.

Stop-Loss Reinsurance Premium for Environmental Impairment Liability Insurance

Stop-Loss Reinsurance Premium for Environmental Impairment Liability Insurance

The Many Flavors of Environmental Insurance

The market for environmental impairment liability (EIL) and pollution legal liability (PLL) insurance is approaching its thirtieth anniversary. During those years, the market has developed from a one-size-fits-all approach that consisted of a couple insurers to one that can specifically tailor coverages to the needs of a specific transaction or risk. While increases in capacity and flexibility have created diverse choices for policyholders, failure to understand the nuances presented by the current policy forms presents both challenges and opportunities. This article discusses how the EIL/PLL market has developed and highlights some of the more substantive differences in policy forms that are currently available.

Issues in Coverage for Preexisting Pollution Conditions under Pollution Liability Insurance Policies

Pollution liability insurance policies provide coverage for claims and costs associated with pollution conditions that develop and commence during the policy period. Coverage under such policies for claims arising from pollution conditions that existed before the policy incepted, however, varies significantly under different policy forms. This article addresses the two principal means that insurers have utilized to limit the risks associated with preexisting pollution conditions under pollution policies: the known conditions exclusion and retroactive date provisions. The article explains that these provisions have received mixed treatment in the courts and are likely to continue to be a focus of future coverage litigation involving environmental impairment liability and pollution legal liability policies.

084045 (E60) The contribution of environmental impairment liability insurance to eco efficiency : Zweifel P.,The Geneva papers on risk and insurance, 21, 336–340 (1996)

084045 (E60) The contribution of environmental impairment liability insurance to eco efficiency : Zweifel P.,The Geneva papers on risk and insurance, 21, 336–340 (1996)

Environmental impairment liability in the czech republic

The subject treated in this article is environmental impairment liability, which becomes a still more important legal and economic instrument of environmental policy complying with claim of denationalization. It is a market-conforming instrument not requiring that the public authorities will focus their activities on direct management of microeconomic agents. The article reflects: brief description of the functions and position of environmental impairment liability among the other tools of environmental policy; evaluation of the extent to which the initiatives aimed at European harmonisation have been successful; analysis of the present state of works on environmental impairment liability legislation in the Czech Republic.

Editors Introduction

Editors Introduction

The Contribution of Environmental Impairment Liability (EIL) Insurance to Eco-Efficiency

The Contribution of Environmental Impairment Liability (EIL) Insurance to Eco-Efficiency

Reinsurance of Environmental Risk Pricing and Risk Assessment

Despite the increasing liberalisation of insurance markets, the principle of the locality of an insurance business remains decisive for General Liability business and particularly for the insurance of environmental impairment liability. General Liability insurance has its basis in national legislation and there is no need to describe how much this legislation differs with respect to environmental liability between the European countries.

Environmental impairment liability as an instrument of environmental policy

This paper evaluates the role of liability that may arise in the context of an impairment of the environment. Environmental Impairment Liability (or EIL for short) is analyzed as an instrument of environmental policy. Interrelationships between injurers, victims, the legal system, insurers, and the environment serve to show that EIL may contribute to preserve the environment. However, peculiarities such as mass torts and uncertain behavior of courts serve to detract from the effectiveness of EIL. The question arises of whether these shortcomings are 1 mitigated or exacerbated by EIL insurance. The potential contribution of insurance to EIL is found to be undermined by partial market failure, which, however, can be alleviated by permitting the flotation of environmental risk warrants on capital markets.

Environmental Impairment Liability and the Chemical Industry

Environmental Impairment Liability and the Chemical Industry

The Determinants of the Disposition of Product Liability Claims and Compensation for Bodily Injury

Previous articleNext article No AccessThe Determinants of the Disposition of Product Liability Claims and Compensation for Bodily InjuryW. Kip ViscusiW. Kip Viscusi Search for more articles by this author PDFPDF PLUS Add to favoritesDownload CitationTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints Share onFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditEmail SectionsMoreDetailsFiguresReferencesCited by The Journal of Legal Studies Volume 15, Number 2Jun., 1986 Sponsored by The University of Chicago Law School Article DOIhttps://doi.org/10.1086/467815 Views: 8Total views on this site Citations: 31Citations are reported from Crossref Copyright 1986 The University of ChicagoPDF download Crossref reports the following articles citing this article:Lubna Zia, Shujahat Haider Hashmi Disposition Effect and Overconfidence in Pakistani Stock Market, SSRN Electronic Journal (Jan 2016).https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2745749Herbert M. Kritzer Litigation, (Jan 2015): 265–275.https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-08-097086-8.86082-1P. Fenn, N. Rickman Information and the Disposition of Medical Malpractice Claims: A Competing Risks Analysis, Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization 30, no.22 (May 2013): 244–274.https://doi.org/10.1093/jleo/ewt002Sasha Romanosky, David Hoffman, Alessandro Acquisti Empirical Analysis of Data Breach Litigation, Journal of Empirical Legal Studies 11, no.11 (Jan 2014): 74–104.https://doi.org/10.1111/jels.12035Jean-François Sattin Procédures d’audit et gestion des licences de brevet : une analyse transactionnelle, Revue d'économie industrielle , no.139139 (Sep 2012): 77–99.https://doi.org/10.4000/rei.5447Sasha Romanosky, David A. Hoffman, Alessandro Acquisti Empirical Analysis of Data Breach Litigation, SSRN Electronic Journal (Jan 2012).https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1986461Marc Poitras, Ralph Frasca A unified model of settlement and trial expenditures: The Priest–Klein model extended, International Review of Law and Economics 31, no.33 (Sep 2011): 188–195.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.irle.2011.07.006Miguel Santolino Determinants of the decision to appeal against motor bodily injury judgements made by Spanish trial courts, International Review of Law and Economics 30, no.11 (Mar 2010): 37–45.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.irle.2009.09.002Mark J. Browne, Joan T. Schmit Litigation Patterns in Automobile Bodily Injury Claims 1977–1997: Effects of Time and Tort Reforms, Journal of Risk & Insurance 75, no.11 (Mar 2008): 83–100.https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6975.2007.00249.xMark J. Browne, Joan T. Schmit Patterns in Personal Automobile Third-Party Bodily Injury Litigation: 1977 - 1997, SSRN Electronic Journal (Jan 2004).https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.588481F. P. Tulder, B. C. J. Velthoven Econom(etr)ics of crime and litigation, Statistica Neerlandica 57, no.33 (Aug 2003): 321–346.https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9574.00234Steven Shavell Economic Analysis of Litigation and the Legal Process, SSRN Electronic Journal (Jan 2003).https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.382060Louis Kaplow, Steven Shavell Economic Analysis of Law, (Jan 2002): 1661–1784.https://doi.org/10.1016/S1573-4420(02)80029-5B. Zorina Khan Commerce and Cooperation: Litigation and Settlement of Civil Disputes on the Australian Frontier, 1860–1990, The Journal of Economic History 60, no.44 (Jul 2012): 1088–1119.https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022050700026383 By Howard F. Chang and Hilary Sigman Incentives to Settle under Joint and Several Liability: An Empirical Analysis of Superfund Litigation Chang & Sigman, The Journal of Legal Studies 29, no.11 (Jul 2015): 205–236.https://doi.org/10.1086/468068Donald Wittman Lay Juries Versus Professional Arbitrators and the Arbitrator Selection Hypothesis, SSRN Electronic Journal (Jan 2000).https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.243760Robert Puelz, Mark J. Browne The Effect of Legal Rules on the Value of Economic and Non-Economic Damages and the Decision to File, SSRN Electronic Journal (Jan 1998).https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.120608Andrew S. Rajkumar, Michael T. French Drug abuse, crime costs, and the economic benefits of treatment, Journal of Quantitative Criminology 13, no.33 (Sep 1997): 291–323.https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02221094Jeffery Mullis Medical malpractice, social structure, and social control, Sociological Forum 10, no.11 (Mar 1995): 135–163.https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02098567Peter Zweifel, Jean-Robert Tyran Environmental impairment liability as an instrument of environmental policy, Ecological Economics 11, no.11 (Sep 1994): 43–56.https://doi.org/10.1016/0921-8009(94)90049-3 Combined Bibliography, Justice System Journal 16, no.22 (Sep 2014): 155–172.https://doi.org/10.1080/23277556.1993.10871176BRIAN OSTROM, DAVID ROTTMAN, ROGER HANSON What are Tort Awards Really Like? The Untold Story from the State Courts, Law & Policy 14, no.11 (Jan 1992): 77–106.https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9930.1992.tb00076.xFrank A. Sloan, Thomas J. Hoerger Uncertainty, information and resolution of medical malpractice disputes, Journal of Risk and Uncertainty 4, no.44 (Dec 1991): 403–423.https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00056164Ivy E. Broder, Thomas A. Husted The effect of post-trial activity on large jury awards, International Review of Law and Economics 11, no.33 (Dec 1991): 251–260.https://doi.org/10.1016/0144-8188(91)90002-UW. Kip Viscusi, Joni Hersch The market response to product safety litigation, Journal of Regulatory Economics 2, no.33 (Sep 1990): 215–230.https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00134061James W. Hughes, Edward A. Snyder Policy Analysis of Medical Malpractice Reforms: What Can We Learn From Claims Data?, Journal of Business & Economic Statistics 7, no.44 (Oct 1989): 423–431.https://doi.org/10.1080/07350015.1989.10509754William L. F. Felstiner, Tom Durkin, Peter Siegelman Consumers as workers: The problems of complacent theory, Journal of Consumer Policy 12, no.33 (Sep 1989): 381–396.https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00412143W. L. F. FELSTINER, PETER SIEGELMAN Neoclassical Difficulties: Tort Deterrence for Latent Injuries*, Law & Policy 11, no.33 (Jun 2008): 309–329.https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9930.1989.tb00031.xHoward K. Gruenspecht, Lester B. Lave Chapter 26 The economics of health, safety, and environmental regulation, (Jan 1989): 1507–1550.https://doi.org/10.1016/S1573-448X(89)02014-5W.Kip Viscusi Pain and suffering in product liability cases: Systematic compensation or capricious awards?, International Review of Law and Economics 8, no.22 (Dec 1988): 203–220.https://doi.org/10.1016/0144-8188(88)90006-3 W. Kip Viscusi Product Liability Litigation with Risk Aversion, The Journal of Legal Studies 17, no.11 (Oct 2015): 101–121.https://doi.org/10.1086/468123

A Proposal for Dealing with the Compensation of Occupational Diseases

Previous articleNext article No AccessA Proposal for Dealing with the Compensation of Occupational DiseasesPeter S. BarthPeter S. Barth Search for more articles by this author PDFPDF PLUS Add to favoritesDownload CitationTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints Share onFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditEmail SectionsMoreDetailsFiguresReferencesCited by The Journal of Legal Studies Volume 13, Number 3Aug., 1984Catastrophic Personal Injuries Sponsored by The University of Chicago Law School Article DOIhttps://doi.org/10.1086/467759 Views: 5Total views on this site Citations: 5Citations are reported from Crossref Copyright 1984 The University of ChicagoPDF download Crossref reports the following articles citing this article:Peter Zweifel, Jean-Robert Tyran Environmental impairment liability as an instrument of environmental policy, Ecological Economics 11, no.11 (Sep 1994): 43–56.https://doi.org/10.1016/0921-8009(94)90049-3William L. F. Felstiner, Tom Durkin, Peter Siegelman Consumers as workers: The problems of complacent theory, Journal of Consumer Policy 12, no.33 (Sep 1989): 381–396.https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00412143W. L. F. FELSTINER, PETER SIEGELMAN Neoclassical Difficulties: Tort Deterrence for Latent Injuries*, Law & Policy 11, no.33 (Jun 2008): 309–329.https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9930.1989.tb00031.xD.N. Dewees, R. Daniels Prevention and compensation of industrial disease, International Review of Law and Economics 8, no.11 (Jun 1988): 51–72.https://doi.org/10.1016/0144-8188(88)90015-4Harris Schlesinger, Emilio C. Venezian Compensating Victims of Occupational Diseases: Can We Structure an Effective Policy?, (Jan 1988): 59–79.https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-015-7789-2_4