General analytical frameworks

Limitation framing - principled = tensions between

When X appears principled, its application reveals a tension between (doctrinal aim) and (practical outcome)

Limitation framing - Coherence undermined by

The coherence of this rule is undermined by its inconsistent treatment of X

Hidden policy exposure - pursues but in practice

This doctrine pursues (value), but in practice prioritises (competing value)

Hidden policy exposure - Suggests law is less about

This suggests the law is less about principle and more about managing (institutional concern)

Line-drawing critique - distinction… difficult to justify

The distinction between X and Y is difficult to justify beyond formalism

Line-drawing critique - Boundary unstable

This boundary is normatively unstable because it turns on (arbitrary factor)

Incrementalism vs coherence - case law reflects

The case law reflects incremental development rather than principled design

Incrementalism vs coherence - piecemeal evolution

This piecemeal evolution has produced a body of law that is workable, but not conceptually coherent

Rights vs pragmatism - judicial preference

The decision reflects a judicial preference for adminsitrability over conceptual clarity

Rights vs pragmatism - Reveals underlying reluctance

This reveals an underlying reluctance to extend liability in a way that would impose indeterminate burdens

Evaluation of reform

Although reform would improve doctrinal clarity, it risks undermining certainty (etc.)