A tort is a civil (non-criminal) wrong that causes someone else to suffer loss or harm. Economists propose that tort law is best understood in consequentialist terms. Corrective justice theorists claim that tort law is best understood in nonconsequentialist terms.
I would say the outcomes in long term if are not good then tort -nonconsequentialist is the way to go .
Hi
I think analyses the significance of consequentialism in legislation and legal adjudication. After a short discussion of legislative impact assessment, the debate on consequentialism in legal adjudication is presented in detail, making particular reference to the situation in many countries, it is differ from country to another . By way of exemplification, I can conclude that we can consider the application of the Hand rule in tort liability as i think.
Best wishes
Since the Tort Law explicitly describes that "A tort is a civil error (not criminal) that causes another person to suffer loss or damage"; often damages and losses have economic implications, so I agree with economists that the law of grievances is best understood in terms "consequentialist"
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Correction