Repairing Harms and Answering for Wrongs

Philosophical Foundations of Tort Law, John Oberdiek, ed., Oxford University Press, 2014, Forthcoming

Minnesota Legal Studies Research Paper No. 14-06

20 Pages Posted: 31 Jan 2014

See all articles by R. A. Duff

R. A. Duff

University of Stirling - Department of Philosophy

Date Written: January 29, 2014

Abstract

I contrast two models of tort law: a cost-allocation model, and the ‘civil recourse’ model offered by Golberg and Zipursky. The former makes it possible to draw a clear distinction between tort law and criminal law, and explains some of the differentiating features. The latter deals plausibly with kinds of cases that the cost-allocation model cannot accommodate: but it does so by bringing tort law much closer to criminal law, and thus raises several questions about the proper relationship between them.

Keywords: tort law, criminal law, cost allocation, civil recourse, Goldberg and Zipursky

Suggested Citation

Duff, Robin Antony, Repairing Harms and Answering for Wrongs (January 29, 2014). Philosophical Foundations of Tort Law, John Oberdiek, ed., Oxford University Press, 2014, Forthcoming , Minnesota Legal Studies Research Paper No. 14-06, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2387773

Robin Antony Duff (Contact Author)

University of Stirling - Department of Philosophy ( email )

Stirling, Scotland FK9 4LA
United Kingdom

Do you have a job opening that you would like to promote on SSRN?

Paper statistics

Downloads
165
Abstract Views
1,130
rank
246,709
PlumX Metrics