skip to content
Thursday, 13 January 2022

Cambridge Faculty of Law Legal Studies Research Paper SeriesThe Faculty has published Volume 12 Number 7 of the University of Cambridge Faculty of Law Legal Studies Research Paper Series on SSRN.

This issue includes the following articles:

Matthew H. Kramer: Freedom of Expression as Self-Restraint (30/2021)

In my recent book Freedom of Expression as Self-Restraint, I expound and defend the moral principle of freedom of expression. This article recounts a few of the main strands of the exposition in that book, and it touches upon the justification for the principle of freedom of expression. Supplementing the abstract ideas broached in the article are several illustrative examples that render the abstractions more accessible.

Catherine Barnard & Emilija Leinarte: Movement of Goods Under the TCA (31/2021)

The most comprehensive part of the Trade and Cooperation Agreement (TCA) concluded between the EU and the UK concerned the movement of goods. The aim of this article is to consider the approach taken by the TCA to trade of goods when considered in the light of the EU internal market regime. We argue that it would be entirely wrong to consider the provisions in the TCA as free movement of goods ‘minus’. Rather, with the exception of the Ireland/Northern Ireland Protocol (NIP), which is part of the Withdrawal Agreement (WA), not the TCA, the approach to the movement of goods has much more in common with the World Trade Organisation’s (WTO) provisions on goods, on which the TCA draws heavily, than EU law. From a political perspective, this shift to a ‘WTO plus’ approach is because the UK government considered that the Brexit vote gave a green light for a total break with the EU’s rules. From a legal perspective, the movement of goods between the UK and the EU is covered by the Heading on Trade, which is part of a Free Trade Agreement, not part of the Single Market, with all the consequences which flow from this shift.

The chapter is structured as follows. Section 2 will consider the UK’s approach to negotiating its new trading relationship. Section 2 will Section 3 will examine the TCA’s approach to the trade in goods, focusing on four key elements of the goods regime under the TCA: (i) the principle of non-discrimination; (ii) the significance of a ‘0, 0’ agreement; (iii) regulatory barriers to trade; and (iv) (absence of) mutual recognition. Section 3 will address the unique case of Northern Ireland. Section 4 concludes.

Bobby V. Reddy: The SPACtacular Rise of the Special Purpose Acquisition Company: A Retail Investor’s Worst Nightmare (32/2021)

Special Purpose Acquisition Companies (SPACs) are non-operating entities seeking public listings with the sole intention of subsequently acquiring other companies. Once a target has been acquired, the SPAC de-lists and the newly enlarged group reapplies for listing as a, now publicly-owned, operating entity, thereby streamlining the process to IPO for the target. SPACs have surged in the US recently, with SPAC sponsors making concerted efforts to attract not only institutional, but also retail, investors. With a view to invigorating SPAC activity in the UK, new regulations have been introduced that will enable UK SPAC sponsors to mimic the structure of US SPACs. However, in this article, it will be discussed that unlike the more benign nature of traditional UK SPACs, the typical US-style SPAC is simply a financial instrument for institutional investors built upon the investment of retail investors, and promoting such an evolution in the UK may be misguided.

Brian R. Cheffins: History and Turning the Antitrust Page (33/2021)

Present-day advocates of antitrust reform referred to as “New Brandeisians” have invoked history in pressing the case for change. The New Brandeisians bemoan the upending of a mid-20th century “golden age” of antitrust by an intellectual movement known as the Chicago School. In fact, mid-20th century enforcement of antitrust was uneven and large corporations exercised substantial market power. The Chicago School also was not as decisive an agent of change as the New Brandeisians suggest. Doubts about the efficacy of government regulation and concerns about foreign competition did much to foster the late 20th century counter-revolution antitrust experienced.


Interested readers can browse the Working Paper Series at SSRN, or sign up to subscribe to distributions of the the e-journal.