Causation in the Law. H. L. A. Hart and Tony Honoré. Abstract. This text is an updated and extended second edition supporting the findings of its well-known. This chapter maintains that there is no satisfactory analysis of causation in non- causal terms in the huge philosophical literature on the topic. It concludes that. Criteria for the Existence of Causal Connection in Law .. Hart, H.L.A., and Tony Honoré, Causation in the Law, 2nd ed., Oxford: Clarendon.
||11 September 2015
|PDF File Size:
|ePub File Size:
||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]
It also requires that the purpose of the law should encompass harm of the sort for which cwusation remedy is sought. They vary from one branch of the law and one legal system to another. Though it is controversial whether causal connection is to be conceived as a relation between events or facts Davidsonin law both are relevant.
In law the second and third of these functions of the notion of cause are prominent, often in combination. Thus, in some contexts only physical, not economic or psychological harm grounds a legal remedy.
Causation in the Law – H. L. A. Hart; Tony Honoré – Oxford University Press
VI The Law of Tort: The aim can be either to explain a class of events or a particular event. There is no good reason hatt transfer them from an explanatory to an attributive context.
A second reason why causing harm is not a necessary condition i legal responsibility is that there are many contexts in which a person is civilly or criminally responsible irrespective of whether any harm has been caused by their conduct or that of an agency for which they are responsible. These concern two types of case in particular, those of over-determination and of joint determination.
Causation in the Law – Oxford Scholarship
Reason in Action John Finnis. Another limiting notion that has some claim to be regarded as causal is that of probability. Civil War American History: Other proposed criteria hagt limitation are based on moral considerations.
For example, all systems of law hold that a person can be guilty of homicide only if he or she has caused another’s death. Secondly, even if the criteria suggested for selecting certain conditions as causes are in place in explanatory inquiries they are not necessarily so in attributing responsibility.
Request removal from index. If these criteria are then applied in attributive contexts, an agency will not be regarded as the cause of an outcome when that outcome is explained by a later abnormal action or conjunction of events or a deliberate intervention designed to bring it about.
How to cite this entry.
Did one action, event, process or state yhe affairs event for short cause another? University Press Scholarship Online. In many legal contexts and in the view of many theorists a single criterion is called for. Legal, Political, and Moral Philosophy.
Causation in the Law
XI Causation and Contract. The events in issue must be identified from the point of view of the time, place and persons involved, but the aspect of the events between which a causal link must be shown has to be specified in such a way as to show that it falls within the relevant legal categories, such as in the example given above negligence and physical injury.
Another concerns the aspiration of the law to achieve results that are morally unobjectionable. Is the risk of lsw into the canal different from the risk of being pushed into it? Thus, if an employer is responsible for harm caused by his or her employee to another person the employee may or may not also be legally responsible for that harm.
Social Dynamics Brian Skyrms. This can be done either by an appeal to intuitive causationn of responsibility or by recourse to an alternative ground of responsibility based on risk.
Causation in the Law. If you think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.
In that case the limits set by causal and purposive criteria coincide.
It concludes that, although no such analysis yhe available, legal decision-makers can rely on many serviceable generalizations that render such an analysis superfluous. Causal minimalists treat all these theories as non-causal, in the sense that they embody grounds of legal policy other than the policy iin holding the agent responsible for the nart caused by their action or intervention.
XV Evidence and Procedure. Theorists who regard fault as an essential condition of criminal or civil responsibility often argue that a person should not be liable for unintended and unforeseeable harm. It is not a necessary condition for two reasons. It is true that sometimes the purpose of legal prohibition may be the simple one of imposing responsibility for the harm caused by a breach of that prohibition. The responsibility of the person who bears the risk may be additional or alternative to the responsibility of the person if any who wrongfully caused the harm in question.
Griffin on Human Rights Roger Crisp.
An insurer is required to pay caausation losses caused by an event of the type defined in the insurance policy, such as fire or flooding, but not if the cause of the loss is something else.