FLEXIBILITY OF DAMAGES FOR CONVERSION AND DETINUE

African Journal of International and Comparative Law

Volumn 17, Issue 1, 2009, Pages 102-117

  Nwabueze, Remigius N ^a   Okorie, Polycarp C ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHAMPTON   (United Kingdom)

^b Nigerian Law School   (Nigeria)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84900222312     PISSN: 09548890     EISSN: 17551609     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3366/E0954889009000309     Document Type: Note

References (4)

1. Civil Design Construction Nig. Ltd v SCOA Nig. Ltd [2007] 6 NWLR (Part 1030) 300 (SCN).
2. Tettenborn has already criticised the arbitrariness of this approach: A. Tettenborn, ‘Damages in Conversion – The Exception or the Anomaly?’, 52 Cam. L.J. (1993): 128–147.
3. R.M. Dworkin, ‘Is Law a System of Rules?’ in R. M. Dworkin (ed.), The Philosophy of Law, Oxford University Press (1977), at 47.
4. On the difficulties of defining ‘loss’ in the context of damages: A. Tettenborn, ‘What is a Loss?’ in J. W. Neyers et al. (eds.) Emerging Issues in Tort Law, Hart Publishing (2007), pp. 441–66.