Toward A Unified Theory of Torts
-
Guido Calabresi
For at least the last 50 years two ways of looking at tort law have struggled for dominance. One characterized by system-builders, as Izhak Englard so felicitously termed us; the other by those who have seen in tort law the highest manifestation of the common law tradition of responding to breaches in non-criminal, often non-contractual interpersonal relationships. In this paper, I would like to explore the relationship between these two approaches, which I will suggest, find their common law antecedents, where else but, in the forms of actions, from which so much of modern Anglo-American private law derives. I will suggest that both approaches have always been there and that they have affected and shaped each other over the centuries and continue to do so today.
©2011 Walter de Gruyter GmbH & Co. KG, Berlin/Boston
Articles in the same Issue
- Article
- Toward A Unified Theory of Torts
- The Tradeoffs between Regulation and Litigation: Evidence from Insurance Class Actions
- Defending Torts: What Should We Know?
- Qualitative and Quantitative Research on Tort Law Topics: A Comment on Helland & Klick and Kritzer
- Comparative Law - A Must in the European Union: Demonstrated by Tort Law as an Example
- Benefits of Comparative Tort Reasoning: Lost in Translation
Articles in the same Issue
- Article
- Toward A Unified Theory of Torts
- The Tradeoffs between Regulation and Litigation: Evidence from Insurance Class Actions
- Defending Torts: What Should We Know?
- Qualitative and Quantitative Research on Tort Law Topics: A Comment on Helland & Klick and Kritzer
- Comparative Law - A Must in the European Union: Demonstrated by Tort Law as an Example
- Benefits of Comparative Tort Reasoning: Lost in Translation
