The Policy/Operational Dichotomy—A Cuckoo In The Nest
In the case of Anns v. Merton London Borough Council,1 Lord Wilberforce, in considering the negligence liability of a local authority arising out of the exercise of its statutory powers to inspect buildings under construction, drew a distinction between the “policy” and “operational” aspects of the...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Cambridge law journal 1986-11, Vol.45 (3), p.430-456 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 456 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 3 |
| container_start_page | 430 |
| container_title | Cambridge law journal |
| container_volume | 45 |
| creator | Bailey, S. H. Bowman, M. J. |
| description | In the case of Anns v. Merton London Borough Council,1 Lord Wilberforce, in considering the negligence liability of a local authority arising out of the exercise of its statutory powers to inspect buildings under construction, drew a distinction between the “policy” and “operational” aspects of the authority's functions and suggested that liability would more readily arise in respect of the latter. Since that time it has become common to consider the liability of public authorities generally in the tort of negligence by reference to this “policy/operational” dichotomy. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1017/S0008197300118446 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>jstor_proqu</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_1293594216</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><cupid>10_1017_S0008197300118446</cupid><jstor_id>4506930</jstor_id><sourcerecordid>4506930</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c2318-aef9a4d35f4aeda128571844d8efa84e14f4357c29dc7cd3954ba0c2a62657663</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kMtKAzEUhoMoWKsPILgYcD0298uyVq2FYhUrSDchzWTs9JaaTMHufAif0CdxhpYiiKtw-P7_5OMAcI7gFYJItJ4hhBIpQSBESFLKD0ADUa5SjIg6BI0apzU_BicxTqtRKKkaQAwnLnn088JuWoOVC6Ys_NLMk5vCTnzpF5vvz6920lnbmfdJb5nU8QcXy1NwlJt5dGe7twle7m6Hnfu0P-j2Ou1-ajFBMjUuV4ZmhOXUuMwgLJmo9TLpciOpQzSnhAmLVWaFzYhidGygxYZjzgTnpAkut3tXwb-vq4_11K9DZRg1woowRTGqU2ibssHHGFyuV6FYmLDRCOr6PvrPfarOxbYzjaUP-wJlkCsCK5xucRFL97HHJsw0F0QwzbtPmoyuR69DLPWoypOdglmMQ5G9uV-m_0r8ABgrfk8</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1293594216</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>The Policy/Operational Dichotomy—A Cuckoo In The Nest</title><source>Jstor Complete Legacy</source><source>HeinOnline Law Journal Library</source><source>Cambridge Journals</source><source>Periodicals Index Online</source><creator>Bailey, S. H. ; Bowman, M. J.</creator><creatorcontrib>Bailey, S. H. ; Bowman, M. J.</creatorcontrib><description>In the case of Anns v. Merton London Borough Council,1 Lord Wilberforce, in considering the negligence liability of a local authority arising out of the exercise of its statutory powers to inspect buildings under construction, drew a distinction between the “policy” and “operational” aspects of the authority's functions and suggested that liability would more readily arise in respect of the latter. Since that time it has become common to consider the liability of public authorities generally in the tort of negligence by reference to this “policy/operational” dichotomy.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0008-1973</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1469-2139</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1017/S0008197300118446</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press</publisher><subject>Civil negligence ; Common law ; Defendants ; Duty of care ; Legal liability ; Plaintiffs ; Public authorities ; Statutory law ; Torts ; Ultra vires</subject><ispartof>Cambridge law journal, 1986-11, Vol.45 (3), p.430-456</ispartof><rights>Copyright © Cambridge Law Journal and Contributors 1986</rights><rights>Copyright 1986 The Cambridge Law Journal and Contributors</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/4506930$$EPDF$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S0008197300118446/type/journal_article$$EHTML$$P50$$Gcambridge$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>164,314,776,780,799,27846,27901,27902,55603,57992,58225</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Bailey, S. H.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bowman, M. J.</creatorcontrib><title>The Policy/Operational Dichotomy—A Cuckoo In The Nest</title><title>Cambridge law journal</title><addtitle>C.L.J</addtitle><description>In the case of Anns v. Merton London Borough Council,1 Lord Wilberforce, in considering the negligence liability of a local authority arising out of the exercise of its statutory powers to inspect buildings under construction, drew a distinction between the “policy” and “operational” aspects of the authority's functions and suggested that liability would more readily arise in respect of the latter. Since that time it has become common to consider the liability of public authorities generally in the tort of negligence by reference to this “policy/operational” dichotomy.</description><subject>Civil negligence</subject><subject>Common law</subject><subject>Defendants</subject><subject>Duty of care</subject><subject>Legal liability</subject><subject>Plaintiffs</subject><subject>Public authorities</subject><subject>Statutory law</subject><subject>Torts</subject><subject>Ultra vires</subject><issn>0008-1973</issn><issn>1469-2139</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>1986</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>K30</sourceid><recordid>eNp1kMtKAzEUhoMoWKsPILgYcD0298uyVq2FYhUrSDchzWTs9JaaTMHufAif0CdxhpYiiKtw-P7_5OMAcI7gFYJItJ4hhBIpQSBESFLKD0ADUa5SjIg6BI0apzU_BicxTqtRKKkaQAwnLnn088JuWoOVC6Ys_NLMk5vCTnzpF5vvz6920lnbmfdJb5nU8QcXy1NwlJt5dGe7twle7m6Hnfu0P-j2Ou1-ajFBMjUuV4ZmhOXUuMwgLJmo9TLpciOpQzSnhAmLVWaFzYhidGygxYZjzgTnpAkut3tXwb-vq4_11K9DZRg1woowRTGqU2ibssHHGFyuV6FYmLDRCOr6PvrPfarOxbYzjaUP-wJlkCsCK5xucRFL97HHJsw0F0QwzbtPmoyuR69DLPWoypOdglmMQ5G9uV-m_0r8ABgrfk8</recordid><startdate>19861101</startdate><enddate>19861101</enddate><creator>Bailey, S. H.</creator><creator>Bowman, M. J.</creator><general>Cambridge University Press</general><general>Stevens and Sons, for the Cambridge University Law Society</general><scope>BSCLL</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>FBAQO</scope><scope>FUVTR</scope><scope>ICWRT</scope><scope>K30</scope><scope>PAAUG</scope><scope>PAWHS</scope><scope>PAWZZ</scope><scope>PAXOH</scope><scope>PBHAV</scope><scope>PBQSW</scope><scope>PBYQZ</scope><scope>PCIWU</scope><scope>PCMID</scope><scope>PCZJX</scope><scope>PDGRG</scope><scope>PDWWI</scope><scope>PETMR</scope><scope>PFVGT</scope><scope>PGXDX</scope><scope>PIHIL</scope><scope>PISVA</scope><scope>PJCTQ</scope><scope>PJTMS</scope><scope>PLCHJ</scope><scope>PMHAD</scope><scope>PNQDJ</scope><scope>POUND</scope><scope>PPLAD</scope><scope>PQAPC</scope><scope>PQCAN</scope><scope>PQCMW</scope><scope>PQEME</scope><scope>PQHKH</scope><scope>PQMID</scope><scope>PQNCT</scope><scope>PQNET</scope><scope>PQSCT</scope><scope>PQSET</scope><scope>PSVJG</scope><scope>PVMQY</scope><scope>PZGFC</scope></search><sort><creationdate>19861101</creationdate><title>The Policy/Operational Dichotomy—A Cuckoo In The Nest</title><author>Bailey, S. H. ; Bowman, M. J.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c2318-aef9a4d35f4aeda128571844d8efa84e14f4357c29dc7cd3954ba0c2a62657663</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>1986</creationdate><topic>Civil negligence</topic><topic>Common law</topic><topic>Defendants</topic><topic>Duty of care</topic><topic>Legal liability</topic><topic>Plaintiffs</topic><topic>Public authorities</topic><topic>Statutory law</topic><topic>Torts</topic><topic>Ultra vires</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Bailey, S. H.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bowman, M. J.</creatorcontrib><collection>Istex</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Periodicals Index Online Segment 02</collection><collection>Periodicals Index Online Segment 06</collection><collection>Periodicals Index Online Segment 28</collection><collection>Periodicals Index Online</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - West</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - International</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - MEA</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - Midwest</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - Northeast</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - Southeast</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - North Central</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - Southeast</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - South Central</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - UK / I</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - Canada</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - EMEALA</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - North Central</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - South Central</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - International</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - International</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - West</collection><collection>Periodicals Index Online Segments 1-50</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - APAC</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - Midwest</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - MEA</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - Canada</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - UK / I</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - EMEALA</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - APAC</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - Canada</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - West</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - EMEALA</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - Northeast</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - Midwest</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - North Central</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - Northeast</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - South Central</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - Southeast</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - UK / I</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - APAC</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - MEA</collection><jtitle>Cambridge law journal</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Bailey, S. H.</au><au>Bowman, M. J.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>The Policy/Operational Dichotomy—A Cuckoo In The Nest</atitle><jtitle>Cambridge law journal</jtitle><addtitle>C.L.J</addtitle><date>1986-11-01</date><risdate>1986</risdate><volume>45</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>430</spage><epage>456</epage><pages>430-456</pages><issn>0008-1973</issn><eissn>1469-2139</eissn><abstract>In the case of Anns v. Merton London Borough Council,1 Lord Wilberforce, in considering the negligence liability of a local authority arising out of the exercise of its statutory powers to inspect buildings under construction, drew a distinction between the “policy” and “operational” aspects of the authority's functions and suggested that liability would more readily arise in respect of the latter. Since that time it has become common to consider the liability of public authorities generally in the tort of negligence by reference to this “policy/operational” dichotomy.</abstract><cop>Cambridge, UK</cop><pub>Cambridge University Press</pub><doi>10.1017/S0008197300118446</doi><tpages>27</tpages></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0008-1973 |
| ispartof | Cambridge law journal, 1986-11, Vol.45 (3), p.430-456 |
| issn | 0008-1973 1469-2139 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_journals_1293594216 |
| source | Jstor Complete Legacy; HeinOnline Law Journal Library; Cambridge Journals; Periodicals Index Online |
| subjects | Civil negligence Common law Defendants Duty of care Legal liability Plaintiffs Public authorities Statutory law Torts Ultra vires |
| title | The Policy/Operational Dichotomy—A Cuckoo In The Nest |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-05T06%3A52%3A36IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-jstor_proqu&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=The%20Policy/Operational%20Dichotomy%E2%80%94A%20Cuckoo%20In%20The%20Nest&rft.jtitle=Cambridge%20law%20journal&rft.au=Bailey,%20S.%20H.&rft.date=1986-11-01&rft.volume=45&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=430&rft.epage=456&rft.pages=430-456&rft.issn=0008-1973&rft.eissn=1469-2139&rft_id=info:doi/10.1017/S0008197300118446&rft_dat=%3Cjstor_proqu%3E4506930%3C/jstor_proqu%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1293594216&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_cupid=10_1017_S0008197300118446&rft_jstor_id=4506930&rfr_iscdi=true |