Common Law and the Environment: Reply

In: Public choice, Band 89, Heft 1-2, S. 207-209

Abstract

In a reply to Reimund Schwarze's comment (see abstract) on his view of the role of common law (CL) in environmental issues (see abstract 95P10015), Sollner defends his claim that CL is not suited for this area. Contrary to Schwarze's critique, statutory liability is favored over CL liability, & it is argued that CL remains an inefficient means of dealing with the majority of large-number cases. Furthermore, it is suggested that the CL success stories cited by Schwarze would not have been possible without the simplified & standardized precedents established by statutory law. CL is also criticized for its inherent bias in favor of the polluter, regardless of previous outcomes. It is concluded that although the dichotomy of small- vs large-number cases may seem arbitrary, this distinction is essential to evaluating the historical & potential efficiency of common & statutory law cases. 6 References. T. Sevier