David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Law and Philosophy 2 (1):89 - 117 (1983)
This essay applies Hegel's theory of remedies to the question of whether and when breach of a penal statute should attract civil liability in tort. For Hegel, the purpose of a remedy is to vindicate the human right to self-determination by refuting the claim to validity implied in intentional or negligent acts that infringe this right. Accordingly, in determining the civil effect of legislation, a distinction must be made between statutes that effectuate pre-existing rights and those which create new rights in the attempt to maximize aggregate welfare. The former should confer a civil right of action, the latter should not. Statutes that impose a duty of affirmative action should be enforced civilly if their purpose is to protect individual autonomy in circumstances where one person has gained control over the welfare of another. And statutes that protect persons from exposure to unreasonable risk should confer a civil right of action provided that the conditions of ordinary negligence liability are met. These conditions ought to supplant those connected with the legislative intent theory of statutory torts.
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
J. Robert, S. Prichard & Alan Brudner (1983). Tort Liability for Breach of Statute: A Natural Rights Perspective. [REVIEW] Law and Philosophy 2 (1):89-117.
Theodore M. Benditt (1982). Liability for Failing to Rescue. Law and Philosophy 1 (3):391 - 418.
Joseph M. Steiner (1982). Putting Fault Back Into Products Liability: A Modest Reconstruction of Tort Theory. [REVIEW] Law and Philosophy 1 (3):419 - 449.
Barbara LaBossiere (2008). Tort Liability in the United States and Its Threat to Class Action Justice. Philosophy in the Contemporary World 15 (1):112-124.
Christian Lahnstein (2011). Tort Law and the Ethical Responsibilities of Liability Insurers: Comments From a Reinsurer's Perspective. Journal of Business Ethics 103 (S1):87-94.
Aukje A. H. Van Hoek, Transnational Corporate Social Responsibility: Some Issues with Regard to the Liability of European Corporations for Labour Law Infringements in the Countries of Establishment of Their Suppliers.
David G. Owen (ed.) (1995). Philosophical Foundations of Tort Law. Oxford University Press.
Alfredo Ferrante, A First Approach to the Avant-Projet Catala and to the New Contractual Liability and Tort in French Law.
John Oberdiek (2008). Philosophical Issues in Tort Law. Philosophy Compass 3 (4):734-748.
Alan Strudler (1992). Mass Torts and Moral Principles. Law and Philosophy 11 (4):297 - 330.
Jeff McMahan (2005). The Basis of Moral Liability to Defensive Killing. Philosophical Issues 15 (1):386–405.
Added to index2011-05-29
Total downloads3 ( #273,092 of 1,096,504 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #238,630 of 1,096,504 )
How can I increase my downloads?