ABSTRACT
How can tort reparation be justified? Stephen Perry’s comparative account relies on two ideas: (1) the loss arising from an injurious event should be distributed between the injurer and the victim rather than be borne by society at large; and (2) the distribution of loss between the injurer and the victim depends on a comparison of their ‘relative degree of fault’. Many believe that a strength of the comparative account lies in its ability to explain apportionment in contributory negligence cases. I argue, to the contrary, that such cases pose a serious difficulty for the account.
Peter Chau, The Comparative Account of Tort Reparation, Ratio Juris. First published: 5 August 2024.
Leave a Reply