The Comparative Account of Tort Reparation

How can tort reparation be justified? Stephen Perry's comparative account relies on two ideas: (1) the loss arising from an injurious event should be distributed between the injurer and the victim rather than be borne by society at large; and (2) the distribution of loss between the injurer and...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Ratio juris 2024-09, Vol.37 (3), p.190-209
Main Author: Chau, Peter
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Legal studies
Torts
Citations: Items that this one cites
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:How can tort reparation be justified? Stephen Perry's comparative account relies on two ideas: (1) the loss arising from an injurious event should be distributed between the injurer and the victim rather than be borne by society at large; and (2) the distribution of loss between the injurer and the victim depends on a comparison of their “relative degree of fault.” Many believe that a strength of the comparative account lies in its ability to explain apportionment in contributory negligence cases. I argue, to the contrary, that such cases pose a serious difficulty for the account.
ISSN:0952-1917
1467-9337
DOI:10.1111/raju.12415