12/29 http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20051229/od_nm/britain_party_dc
The article above says certain areas require more claims than
others. Does the insurance company have a right to charge
your premium based on location, and if so, does it have a
right to charge different based on last names (like scotsman)?
In the US, you're not allowed to use things like sex, religion,
age, and race, but what about the UK?
\_ Question 1. Sure it can, it happens all the time.
Question 2. Don't know, UK isn't a constitutional government
AFAIK, but since it's the origin of common law I would assume
you can't (whole concept of being a subject to the crown with
certain inalienable rights per magna carta).
\- um i think there is a fair amount of confusion in various
\- hello i think there is a fair amount of confusion in various
comments above like "in the US you are not allowed to
use [sic] things like [list]" and "UK [sic] isn't a
constitutional government". also it seems like you are
alluding to the notion of what is called "sovereign immunity"
although i am not sure what you point is about "common law"
and the "magna carta". you may wish to see the very fine book
The Law of the Land, by Charles Rembar. some random comments:
\_ Well, for starters, the U.S. law (at least that which is
not covered by the Constitution expressly) is derived
originally from English Common Law. English Common Law
isn't exactly written down, but is based on accepted
traditional legal practices and case precedent. This is
in contrast to what's called "continental law" which
is more "rule-based." What this translates into is that
the common law systems, such as the U.S. and commonwealth
countries the system is often based on the adversarial system,
the oppossing parties essentially run the trial while the
jurist ensures that the proceedings are run in accordance
to procedure (either civil or criminal, etc.). In the
continental system the jursist supposedly has a much more
active role. In real life I doubt that the systems differ
much in modern day contexts. The amount of standardized
procedure in the U.S. has resulted in what I like to call
"form based law," in which we are innundated with Judicial
Council forms, especially for things like divorces or
DUIs. I'd say that 90% of the law that I do is routine, and
I'm sure it's very similar throughout the world (I know for
a fact that patent law certainly is). As for the magna carta,
it basically set a precedent for the limitations of
government through the use of a contract, so it is significant
in the tradition of our modern day democratic institutions,
as such a copy is prominently displayed in DC next to the
constitution (at least when I was visiting it).
\_ You are confused about so many areas of legal history
and terminology this is no longer worth talking about.
e.g. common law is characterized by being "judge made"
based on actual cases ... in contrast to code/civil
law, which is statue-based by a committe or
legislature or some other codifying authority. the
english may not have a WRITTEN constitution but
they are a constitutional govt ... in their case
the line between parliamentary statue and "rights
under the const" are a little vague ... this is
hard to talk about without going into great
detail. for example there is an act on Habeus
Corpus which is reasonably comparable to the HC
section in the us const. however the document
known as the "Bill of Rights" in english history,
is not comparable to the US Const's BoR. comments
like "English Common Law isn't exactly written down"
is ridiculous. If you want to see where the Rule in
Hadley v. Baxendale comes from, you can actually read
the decision Hadley v. Baxendale ... some of it is
based on custom which dont flow from a single
authoritative document, but the huge body of
prior cases are written down.
1. you may wish to look up "adverse selection" in the context
of insurance markets and premiums. there are consequences for
not allowing insurance companies to not consider all relevant
factors. also there are indirect ways to influence your insured
pool ... like having your office on the 8th floor of a bldg
with no elevator [ok this may violate ADA, but you see what i
mean ... efficiency and "public policy" both play roles in
shaping the insurance business] 2. you can discriminate based on
some of the factors you list, but different factors requires
different levels of "scrutiny" [which means different levels
of justification and narrow tailoring]. also this obligation
doesnt apply to all occasions. you can invite whomever you want
to your house for poker and beer, but if you apply for a alchol
lic to run a booze operation, you may not be able to keep certain
people out. BTW, i think english law begins before the magna
people out. 3. i think english law begins before the magna
\_ I'm not quite sure what you are trying to say here, but I
never implied that english common law started with the
magna carta. English common law started much further back,
and even has historical roots all the way to the Roman
occupation. My point was that England is not a constitutional
democracy (it never was), and it has the concepts that are
embodied within the U.S. model (the constitution and the
subsequent bill of rights) through tradition. However,
not having things written down did apparently pose problems,
as can be evinced by the subsequent misunderstandings which
led to the revolution.
\_ You are confused about so many areas of legal history
and terminology this is no longer worth talking about.
Also you are changing your vocabulary ... you say
"const govt" above and then use "constitutional democracy"
later. yes, they are certainly different.
England was essentially a different country [or arguably
wasn't really a country] much before the Norman Conquest so
the Roman stuff isn't even worth talking about. I think
it is fair to say English law really begins to take on
its own identity starting with Henry II.
I do agree there has some continental style "codification"
of various areas of the law in the US sign on to various
"uniform" standards for tort/contract/business practices
etc.
carta ... henry ii, the parent of king john, has an important
legacy in english law [post norman conquest].
people out. BTW, i think english law really does begin before
the magna carta ... henry ii, the parent of king john, has an
important legacy in english law [post norman conquest].
YMWTS, the book referenced at: ~psb/MOTD/EnglishLegalHistory.ref
As the Times Literary Supplement says "it is the standard".oktnx.
\_ Again, I'm not quite sure what you are trying to say here,
but apparently you're trying to interject something
what appears at best tangential information. Anyway,
I'm sure that individuals who are actually interested in
this can do their own research.
\- the last bit was just for the humorous review from
AMAZONG. but ti does discuss the great Assize of
Clarendon, the "census projects", and the Magna Carta
(although i ends before the Magna Carta story really
plays out, which it does for +50yrs after 1215, into
at least the reign of H3.). |