This article examines the changing meaning of property within the modern regulatory state. Government increasingly regulates in order to promote efficient competition within various fields of newly privatised industry. In many instances, this intervention leaves the operator-the nominal 'owner' of a privatised resource or utility-with only a residue of the rights conventionally associated with ownership. In particular, requirements of inter-operability and the compulsory unbundling of network facilities have the effect of exposing the operator's assets to compulsory hire by commercial competitors at non-market rates of revenue return. Where now does the 'reality of proprietorship' reside? Against this background the present article explores the tension between access and exclusion that lies at the heart of contemporary conceptualisations about property. It argues that state intervention has silently generated a novel species of property-a category of 'regulatory property'-which stands the traditional paradigm of private property on its head. An overriding control over specific kinds of vital resource or essential facility is confirmed as belonging to the public or citizenry, who,_x000D_ by force of consumer choice, can determine whether, how and by whom a resource may be exploited. The article goes on to demonstrate that this diffusion of entitlement among citizen-consumers has clear and direct antecedents in an older code of marketplace morality-an explicit common law doctrine of 'quasi-public trust'-that long ago emphasised the correlation of commercial privilege with social obligation. In the present context, the engrafting of some form of fiduciary responsibility on major aggregations of economic power has not only redefined our understanding of the phenomenon of property, but also reinforced important perceptions of individual and corporate citizenship. This development comprises a significant contribution to the modern democratisation of property.

This article examines the evolution of legal education as it has moved through international, transnational, and now global paradigms. It explores these paradigms by reference to practice, pedagogy, and research. Internationalisation saw the world as an archipelago of jurisdictions, with a small number of lawyers involved in mediating disputes between jurisdictions or determining which jurisdiction applied; transnationalisation saw the world as a patchwork, with greater need for familiarity across jurisdictions and hence a growth in exchanges and collaborations; globalisation is now seeing the world as a web in more ways than one, with lawyers needing to be comfortable in multiple jurisdictions.

Some 1.8 billion people today have a mobile phone and no bank account. Mobile money is the provision of financial services through mobile phones. It offers the substantial potential benefits of financial inclusion to poor people in poor nations. This article explores how trust law can be used to address the key risks these mobile money customers face: bankruptcy of the e-money provider, illiquidity and fraud. Prudential regulation is largely inapplicable because most providers are telecommunications companies and not banks. Trust law is a highly efficacious way to address this regulatory lacuna.

This article presents a critical analysis of the approach of the U.S. Supreme Court to recusal motions aimed at one of the Justices of the Court. The catalyst was the controversy arising from the weekend duck-hunting trip of U.S.Vice-President Richard Cheney and Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, after which Justice Scalia denied a motion to recuse himself from a pending case in which his hunting partner, Mr Cheney, was a party. This startling decision is final and conclusive since the Supreme Court refuses to intervene in such decisions. Such an approach by the Court is untenable and contrasts starkly with that of the House of Lords, which did not shrink from disqualifying Lord Hoffmann on grounds of bias in the Pinochet case. A comparative study of comparable common law jurisdictions exposes the U.S. Supreme Court as an island of isolation over this issue. It also provides accessible solutions that are disarming in their simplicity. The particular responses that are commended in this article are formalized self-regulation and substitution.