Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2079586309> ?p ?o ?g. }
Showing items 1 to 67 of
67
with 100 items per page.
- W2079586309 abstract "The two leading theoretical approaches to tort law — economic analysis and corrective justice — are blind to distributive considerations. Moreover, even the main distributive approaches to tort law — loss-spreading and fairness — fail to emphasize egalitarianism as a distributive consideration. This article argues that egalitarianism should influence the normative evaluation of one’s conduct as negligent or not. It first explains why normatively negligence law should be sensitive to the egalitarian concern, suggesting three different accounts for this claim, based on needs, equality, and desert as criteria for distribution. Second, it argues that egalitarianism is commensurate with the basic understanding of negligence law as reflecting corrective justice and notions of fault. The notion of fault is, therefore, reformulated from within, in order to accommodate egalitarianism. Third, I maintain that in order for egalitarianism to accommodate notions of corrective justice, egalitarian concerns should matter also at the stage of the standard of care. While the egalitarian concern can and should be integrated into the duty stage, I argue that such integration is insufficient. A correct and full understanding of the egalitarian concern and the tort of negligence requires a conclusion that the normative evaluation of one’s action as negligent or not cannot be separated from the distributive results that this action entails. The egalitarian concern works at the duty stage as an excuse for not imposing liability for wrongful activity. In contrast, at the standard stage, it works as a justification that turns an otherwise wrongful activity into a legitimate one. My claim is that morally we should usually expect more care from the better-off than from the disadvantaged. Findings of negligence are based on the failure to balance properly between one’s interests and those of another. In deciding to what extent the defendant should burden herself in order to prevent a loss to potential victims, one morally relevant criterion is the relative ability of the injurer and victim to bear precaution costs and expected accident loss, respectively." @default.
- W2079586309 created "2016-06-24" @default.
- W2079586309 creator A5045715930 @default.
- W2079586309 date "2003-01-05" @default.
- W2079586309 modified "2023-10-14" @default.
- W2079586309 title "Egalitarianism as Justification: Why and How Should Egalitarian Considerations Reshape the Standard of Care in Negligence Law?" @default.
- W2079586309 doi "https://doi.org/10.2202/1565-3404.1064" @default.
- W2079586309 hasPublicationYear "2003" @default.
- W2079586309 type Work @default.
- W2079586309 sameAs 2079586309 @default.
- W2079586309 citedByCount "1" @default.
- W2079586309 countsByYear W20795863092017 @default.
- W2079586309 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
- W2079586309 hasAuthorship W2079586309A5045715930 @default.
- W2079586309 hasConcept C11821877 @default.
- W2079586309 hasConcept C139621336 @default.
- W2079586309 hasConcept C144024400 @default.
- W2079586309 hasConcept C162324750 @default.
- W2079586309 hasConcept C17744445 @default.
- W2079586309 hasConcept C190253527 @default.
- W2079586309 hasConcept C199539241 @default.
- W2079586309 hasConcept C200635333 @default.
- W2079586309 hasConcept C202444582 @default.
- W2079586309 hasConcept C2776218876 @default.
- W2079586309 hasConcept C2777381055 @default.
- W2079586309 hasConcept C2777834853 @default.
- W2079586309 hasConcept C2779103253 @default.
- W2079586309 hasConcept C2780129364 @default.
- W2079586309 hasConcept C33923547 @default.
- W2079586309 hasConcept C44725695 @default.
- W2079586309 hasConcept C546784017 @default.
- W2079586309 hasConcept C94625758 @default.
- W2079586309 hasConceptScore W2079586309C11821877 @default.
- W2079586309 hasConceptScore W2079586309C139621336 @default.
- W2079586309 hasConceptScore W2079586309C144024400 @default.
- W2079586309 hasConceptScore W2079586309C162324750 @default.
- W2079586309 hasConceptScore W2079586309C17744445 @default.
- W2079586309 hasConceptScore W2079586309C190253527 @default.
- W2079586309 hasConceptScore W2079586309C199539241 @default.
- W2079586309 hasConceptScore W2079586309C200635333 @default.
- W2079586309 hasConceptScore W2079586309C202444582 @default.
- W2079586309 hasConceptScore W2079586309C2776218876 @default.
- W2079586309 hasConceptScore W2079586309C2777381055 @default.
- W2079586309 hasConceptScore W2079586309C2777834853 @default.
- W2079586309 hasConceptScore W2079586309C2779103253 @default.
- W2079586309 hasConceptScore W2079586309C2780129364 @default.
- W2079586309 hasConceptScore W2079586309C33923547 @default.
- W2079586309 hasConceptScore W2079586309C44725695 @default.
- W2079586309 hasConceptScore W2079586309C546784017 @default.
- W2079586309 hasConceptScore W2079586309C94625758 @default.
- W2079586309 hasLocation W20795863091 @default.
- W2079586309 hasOpenAccess W2079586309 @default.
- W2079586309 hasPrimaryLocation W20795863091 @default.
- W2079586309 hasRelatedWork W1600506036 @default.
- W2079586309 hasRelatedWork W2001761749 @default.
- W2079586309 hasRelatedWork W2281197646 @default.
- W2079586309 hasRelatedWork W2388570381 @default.
- W2079586309 hasRelatedWork W2766284725 @default.
- W2079586309 hasRelatedWork W3152323773 @default.
- W2079586309 hasRelatedWork W3170935616 @default.
- W2079586309 hasRelatedWork W3187794405 @default.
- W2079586309 hasRelatedWork W4210765828 @default.
- W2079586309 hasRelatedWork W95209648 @default.
- W2079586309 isParatext "false" @default.
- W2079586309 isRetracted "false" @default.
- W2079586309 magId "2079586309" @default.
- W2079586309 workType "article" @default.