Jean-Sébastien Borghetti - Academia.edu (original) (raw)
Uploads
Papers by Jean-Sébastien Borghetti
This article is a comparative study of the Dutch and French legal systems regarding four major po... more This article is a comparative study of the Dutch and French legal systems regarding four major points of the French governmental reform project for civil liability : concurrence of actions; limitation and exemption clauses; causation; the obligation to mitigate your own damage. It also addresses the following issues: the question of damages to the environment, and the role of transitional provisions. Through these different areas of study, this article shows that the traditional distinction between contractual and tortuous liability is not necessarily relevant and may even prove a nuisance in certain cases.
Liability for Artificial Intelligence and the Internet of Things, 2019
Since the 1990s, significant litigation has developed in France in connection with hepatitis B va... more Since the 1990s, significant litigation has developed in France in connection with hepatitis B vaccines. Plaintiffs claim compensation for damage resulting from demyelinating diseases, such as multiple sclerosis, allegedly caused or exacerbated by these vaccines. These cases are particularly complex, due to the state of continuing scientific uncertainty as to the possible link between the hepatitis B vaccination and the appearance or development of demyelinating diseases. Problems raised by scientific uncertainty are rather new to lawyers, at least in France and in the context of tort law. Traditional rules, especially those contained in the Civil code (Code civil), the Magna Carta of French law drafted in 1804, have not been devised to deal with such problems, and judges, like legal academics, are ill at ease. They lack the conceptual tools that could help them apprehend and categorize the complex issues at stake in these situations of scientific uncertainty. Yet, French courts, true to their traditional plaintiff-friendly approach, 2 have done their best efforts to grant compensation to plaintiffs in hepatitis B vaccine cases. In order to do so, they have in effect broken through, or at least bypassed, scientific uncertainty, using various, more or less subtle, mechanisms. The development of hepatitis B vaccine litigation in France, discussed in Part I of this article, has led to a bypassing of scientific uncertainty. Part II examines why the current state of French law on this issue is not convincing and what the paths are for improvement. I. THE DEVELOPMENT OF HEPATITIS B VACCINE LITIGATION IN FRANCE The solutions reached by French courts in hepatitis B vaccine cases are better understood against the context in which this litigation developed.
This article is a comparative study of the Dutch and French legal systems regarding four major po... more This article is a comparative study of the Dutch and French legal systems regarding four major points of the French governmental reform project for civil liability : concurrence of actions; limitation and exemption clauses; causation; the obligation to mitigate your own damage. It also addresses the following issues: the question of damages to the environment, and the role of transitional provisions. Through these different areas of study, this article shows that the traditional distinction between contractual and tortuous liability is not necessarily relevant and may even prove a nuisance in certain cases.
Liability for Artificial Intelligence and the Internet of Things, 2019
Since the 1990s, significant litigation has developed in France in connection with hepatitis B va... more Since the 1990s, significant litigation has developed in France in connection with hepatitis B vaccines. Plaintiffs claim compensation for damage resulting from demyelinating diseases, such as multiple sclerosis, allegedly caused or exacerbated by these vaccines. These cases are particularly complex, due to the state of continuing scientific uncertainty as to the possible link between the hepatitis B vaccination and the appearance or development of demyelinating diseases. Problems raised by scientific uncertainty are rather new to lawyers, at least in France and in the context of tort law. Traditional rules, especially those contained in the Civil code (Code civil), the Magna Carta of French law drafted in 1804, have not been devised to deal with such problems, and judges, like legal academics, are ill at ease. They lack the conceptual tools that could help them apprehend and categorize the complex issues at stake in these situations of scientific uncertainty. Yet, French courts, true to their traditional plaintiff-friendly approach, 2 have done their best efforts to grant compensation to plaintiffs in hepatitis B vaccine cases. In order to do so, they have in effect broken through, or at least bypassed, scientific uncertainty, using various, more or less subtle, mechanisms. The development of hepatitis B vaccine litigation in France, discussed in Part I of this article, has led to a bypassing of scientific uncertainty. Part II examines why the current state of French law on this issue is not convincing and what the paths are for improvement. I. THE DEVELOPMENT OF HEPATITIS B VACCINE LITIGATION IN FRANCE The solutions reached by French courts in hepatitis B vaccine cases are better understood against the context in which this litigation developed.