differs from criminal law. Although some types of conduct (e.g., assault or drunk driving injuring somebody else) could both qualify as a crime and a tort, the victim does not hold the power to prosecute the suspect and have him fined or imprisoned for the sake of the public good. This is a power exclusively vested in the state. What the victim can do, however, is claim monetary compensation for the loss resulting from the defendant’s behaviour.
This chapter examines some of the recurrent themes of today’s tort law. The central question in this field is when behaviour is tortious and when it is not. It is certainly a fundamental principle of the law that wrongdoers are liable to pay damages to their victims but this leaves open what exactly constitutes a wrongdoing (Section 3.2). In addition, most modern jurisdictions accept that in some well-defined cases it is not even necessary to prove a wrongdoing by the defendant because he is held liable for another reason than being at fault (Section 3.3). Once it is established that the victim can hold the tortfeasor liable, the question emerges as to which aims a claim for damages serves to achieve (Section 3.4) and whether the damages can be said to have been caused by the wrong (Section 3.5). One final critical question is about alternatives to tort law and what its future may bring (Section 3.6).
The essential question of tort law is whether another person can be...
You are not authenticated to view the full text of this chapter or article.
Elgaronline requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books or journals. Please login through your library system or with your personal username and password on the homepage.
Non-subscribers can freely search the site, view abstracts/ extracts and download selected front matter and introductory chapters for personal use.
Your library may not have purchased all subject areas. If you are authenticated and think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.