Home > Academic Law > Law Quarterly Review, The
Email Page to a Colleague
(* Denotes required field)
* Colleague’s email address
* Your email address
* Subject
The selected product information will be included in the email.
The email addresses you provide will not be used for any other purpose. You can view a detailed privacy statement here.
Your email has been sent.

Law Quarterly Review, The

Law Quarterly Review, The
Practice Area: Academic Law, Reference
ISSN: 0023-933X
Published by: Sweet & Maxwell
Subscription Information: Any Time Start
Format: Journal
Enter a promotion code if you have one. Note: discount applied at Checkout Review Section
Promotion code:


First published in 1885, the Law Quarterly Review provides authoritative and critical analysis on a broad range of legal issues. It is widely acclaimed as a leading platform for scholarly legal debate in the UK and throughout the common law world.

  • With four issues a year, the Law Quarterly Review keeps readers up-to-date with many important legal developments.
  • The Law Quarterly Review is committed to providing a balanced coverage of developments in the common law world.
  • Issues covered are relevant to both academics and practitioners.

Recent Coverage

In 2023, the L.Q.R. continued to pursue an important element of its policy by publishing 26 notes relating to recent court decisions or to other legal developments, in particular statutory ones. It should be noted that a number of them dealt, principally, with developments other than under English law. They included the following contributions:

  • 1. Professor Sir Roy Goode on what properly constitutes property under English law (see “What is Property?” (2023) 139 L.Q.R. 1). The note has proved of great interest and created much discussion for our large number of our readers.
  • 2. Ms. Senara Eggleton on Hughes v Rattan [2022] EWCA Civ 107, in which she argues that the Court of Appeal had, very reasonably, avoided the creation of arbitrary distinctions between the treatment in law of allegations of negligence against doctors and those against dentists (see (2023) 139 L.Q.R. 193).
  • 3. Professor David Campbell on Reference by the Lord Advocate of Devolution Issues Under Paragraph 34 of Schedule 6 to the Scotland Act 1998 [2022] UKSC 31, in which case the Supreme Court unanimously affirmed a limitation on the competence of the Scottish Parliament as regards a referendum about Scottish independence (see (2023) 139 L.Q.R. 354).
  • 4. Dr. Jaclyn Neo on Tan Seng Kee v AG [2022] SGCA 16, where the Singapore Court of Appeal addressed the issue of whether or not the doctrine of substantive legitimate expectations that is recognised by English law (see R. v North and East Devon HA Ex p. Coughlan [2001] Q.B. 213) is also recognised by Singapore law. It decided not only that it is so recognised, but also that it is capable of suspending the enforcement of a statutory provision, and not just of striking down executive or administrative acts (see (2023) 139 L.Q.R. 384).
  • 5. Professor James Lee on Fearn v Board of Trustees of the Tate Gallery [2023] UKSC 4, which concerned the extremely controversial issue of whether or not those people living in flats overlooked by the viewing terrace of the Blatnavik Building at the Tate Modern could sue the Gallery on the basis that the actions of museum visitors in viewing and taking pictures of what was going on in their flats constituted intrusions upon them capable of amounting to a nuisance. The Supreme Court held by a 3-2 majority that they were so actionable (see (2023) 139 L.Q.R. 535).

As regards articles published in 2023, the L.Q.R. continued to publish pieces on widely divergent aspects of the law. Examples showing the variety of topics covered are:

  • 1. “Final Court Jurisprudence in the Crystallisation Era” by Professor Neil Duxbury (2023) 139 L.Q.R. 153, dealing with the notion current in what he describes as the (former) “Crystallisation Era”, that some decisions of the House of Lords should be protected from abrogation except by legislation.
  • 2. “Rethinking Fault Liability and Strict Liability in the Law of Torts”” by Professor James Goudkamp (2023) 139 L.Q.R. 269, in which it is argued that the practice of pigeonholing torts according to the categories of fault liability and strict liability conceals the complexity of tort law and obscures more than it illuminates.
  • 3. “The History of Double Jeopardy and Criminal Jurisdiction: US v Gamble (2019) and R. v Hutchinson (1677)” by Professor Ann Mumford and Professor Peter Alldridge (2023) 139 L.Q.R. 390, arguing that the U.S. Supreme Court in Gamble, in ruling that the English decision in Hutchinson could safely be left out of account as regards whether or not, where two prosecutions on the same matter are brought by “separate sovereigns”, the double jeopardy clause of the Fifth Amendment is violated, had misinterpreted what the latter case stood for.
  • 4. “Privacy, Freedom of Expression and Legitimate Audience Interest” by Professor N.A. Moreham (2023) 139 L.Q.R. 412, concerning the factors that should properly be taken into account when weighing privacy interests against freedom of expression ones in the misuse of private information tort.
  • 5. “Reconceiving Wrongdoing in Lawful Act Duress” by Ms. Iona Branford and Dr. Jodi Gardner (2023) 139 L.Q.R. 629, considering, in the light of the decision of the Supreme Court, in Times Travel v Pakistan International Airline Corporation [2021] UKSC 40, when, if ever, the law should recognise a doctrine of lawful act duress, and what the scope of any such a doctrine should be.


Author Guidelines

Please submit your article, note or book review in a Word document with 1.5 line spacing. All articles and notes should be emailed to the Editor, Prof .Peter Mirfield, Jesus College, Oxford (Peter.Mirfield@jesus.ox.ac.uk) and book reviews to Dr Hayley J. Hooper, Harris Manchester College, Mansfield Road, Oxford, OX1 3TD (hayley.hooper@law.ox.ac.uk ). Articles should not exceed 15,000 words in length, including footnotes and everything else. Notes should contain 3,000 words or fewer, and book reviews 1,500 words or fewer.

Articles, notes and correspondence should be addressed to:
Professor Peter Mirfield
Jesus College
Email: Peter.Mirfield@jesus.ox.ac.uk

Books for review should be addressed to:
Dr Hayley J. Hooper
Harris Manchester College
Mansfield Road
Email: hayley.hooper@law.ox.ac.uk

It is the standard practice of the L.Q.R. to operate blind refereeing of submissions to it.

One referee is consulted and that referee does not have revealed to them the identity of the writer of the submission. However, there are circumstances in which more than one referee will be so consulted, most obviously where the proper assessment of the piece in question requires the exercise of more than one area of legal expertise.

Though the Editor will ensure that the names and affiliations of authors do not appear on the draft that is sent to the referee, it is for authors themselves to remove other means of identifying them in the draft which it is appropriate to remove. In particular, authors need to be aware that the details in the Word metadata file itself may contain their names, such that it is entirely possible that a referee would realise who is/are the author(s). It is the responsibility of the author(s), in these cases, to ensure that such files are amended so that they do not contain them. The identity of the referee or referees is never revealed to the author.

Contributors must supply their full contact details for further correspondence and are responsible for complying with the house style guide


Professor Peter Mirfield, General Editor
Dr Hayley J. Hooper, Book Review Editor


Personal subscription now available – 50% discount

We are introducing a new single-user digital subscription on our eReader, ProView, at a special 50% discount off the standard subscription price.

This special 50% discount is only available to individuals (eg academic, researcher, student, sole practitioner, barrister, retired) and the subscription must be paid for personally. It applies to new subscriptions only.

Email us now at proviewtrial@thomsonreuters.com quoting #individual to trial this journal on ProView or for further details or click here for more information.

All Calendar Year and Any Time Start (ATS) subscriptions are subject to a continuous subscription agreement. This means that your subscriptions will automatically renew in future years, unless you tell us otherwise.

Before each renewal period we will send you an annual subscription statement to enable you to review your subscriptions. You must tell us about any changes within 30 days of the subscription statement date after which you will be invoiced and your subscription(s) will continue for a further year.

4 issues per annum.


Previous years’ bound volume editions: Please contact our customer service team via our website here for more information and pricing.



Thomson Reuters Westlaw UKCLEAR. CLEVER. CONCISE

This title is also available on Westlaw UK, so that you can access it anywhere, anytime.

Having online access to the books you trust through Westlaw UK can add a whole new dimension to how you work with the commentary and guidance found across the breadth of our titles.

Westlaw UK's smart navigation, links to primary law in combination with the expertise within our portfolio of books providing you with a seamless, coherent, and integrated research experience every time you need to refer to the text.

Having access to your book through Westlaw means:

Enhanced contents pages

  • Find what you’re looking for with ease, with content displayed clearly in easy-to-read tables
  • Print, download or email entire chapters or sections using tick boxes by content sets
  • Choose the way you view content sets with collapsible and expandable sections

Firm-wide availability

  • Everyone has access, at all times

Links to primary law

  • Jump directly to the authority you need with links to cases, legislation and journals

You can print/download/email

  • Print, download and email your documents quickly, for use offline or to share with colleague

Access chapter PDFs

  • Download chapters as they appear in print, ready for presentation in court

Supplement PDFs

  • Download whole supplements to a main edition in PDF, ready for court

PDF supplement navigation

  • Browse PDFs with ease using navigational aids and links within the document

A-Z indexing

  • Browse directly to the letter you wish to search, without having to navigate long documents


  • View tables of cases and legislation referred to it the text sorted alphabetically, and link directly to them

Pop-up footnotes

  • View footnotes alongside the text and avoid the need to refer to the end of documents

Call 0345 600 9355 or contact us to find out more.


© Thomson Reuters.

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, or stored in any retrieval system of any nature without prior written permission, except for permitted fair dealing under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988, or in accordance with the terms of a licence issued by the Copyright Licensing Agency in respect of photocopying and/or reprographic reproduction. Application for permission for other use of copyright material including permission to reproduce extracts in other published works shall be made to the publishers. Full acknowledgement of author, publisher and source must be given.
For further information on our products and services, visit www.sweetandmaxwell.co.uk


Editorial Correspondence:

General Editor:
Professor Peter Mirfield
Jesus College

Book Review Editor:
Dr Hayley J. Hooper
Harris Manchester College
Mansfield Road

Sohini Banerjee
Thomson Reuters
5 Canada Square
Canary Wharf
E14 5AQ

back to top
Must Haves