|Appears in Collections:||Law and Philosophy Book Chapters and Sections|
|Title:||Repairing Harms and Answering for Wrongs|
|Authors:||Duff, R A|
|Citation:||Duff RA (2014) Repairing Harms and Answering for Wrongs. In: Oberdiek J (ed.). Philosophical Foundations of the Law of Torts. Philosophical Foundations of Law, Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 212-230.|
Goldberg and Zipursky
|Series/Report no.:||Philosophical Foundations of Law|
|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.|
|Rights:||The publisher does not allow this work to be made publicly available in this Repository. Please use the Request a Copy feature at the foot of the Repository record to request a copy directly from the author. You can only request a copy if you wish to use this work for your own research or private study.|
|Duff Repairing Harms and Answering for Wrongs.pdf||158.97 kB||Adobe PDF||Under Embargo until 31/12/2999 Request a copy|
Note: If any of the files in this item are currently embargoed, you can request a copy directly from the author by clicking the padlock icon above. However, this facility is dependent on the depositor still being contactable at their original email address.
This item is protected by original copyright
Items in the Repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.
If you believe that any material held in STORRE infringes copyright, please contact email@example.com providing details and we will remove the Work from public display in STORRE and investigate your claim.