加重损害赔偿与惩戒性损害赔偿的结构

Allan Beever
{"title":"加重损害赔偿与惩戒性损害赔偿的结构","authors":"Allan Beever","doi":"10.1093/OJLS/23.1.87","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article explores aggravated and exemplary damages in terms of their structure. It argues that the awards are distinguishable and once they have been appropriately analysed it can be seen that aggravated damages have a secure foundation in the private law and are importantly different from other compensatory awards. The article then argues that many of the reasons given in favour of exemplary damages are not consistent with the structure of that award. The article concludes by insisting that exemplary damages should be abolished as they are in serious tension with the nature of civil liability.","PeriodicalId":433815,"journal":{"name":"English Law: Personal Obligations & Legal Theory (Topic)","volume":"14 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2003-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"22","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Structure of Aggravated and Exemplary Damages\",\"authors\":\"Allan Beever\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/OJLS/23.1.87\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This article explores aggravated and exemplary damages in terms of their structure. It argues that the awards are distinguishable and once they have been appropriately analysed it can be seen that aggravated damages have a secure foundation in the private law and are importantly different from other compensatory awards. The article then argues that many of the reasons given in favour of exemplary damages are not consistent with the structure of that award. The article concludes by insisting that exemplary damages should be abolished as they are in serious tension with the nature of civil liability.\",\"PeriodicalId\":433815,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"English Law: Personal Obligations & Legal Theory (Topic)\",\"volume\":\"14 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2003-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"22\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"English Law: Personal Obligations & Legal Theory (Topic)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/OJLS/23.1.87\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"English Law: Personal Obligations & Legal Theory (Topic)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/OJLS/23.1.87","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 22

摘要

本文从结构上探讨了加重损害和示范损害。它认为,这些裁决是可区分的,一旦对它们进行适当的分析,就可以看出,加重损害赔偿在私法上有一个可靠的基础,并且与其他补偿性裁决有重要的不同。文章随后认为,许多支持惩罚性损害赔偿的理由与该裁决的结构不一致。鉴于惩罚性赔偿与民事责任的性质存在着严重的矛盾,因此应当予以废除。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The Structure of Aggravated and Exemplary Damages
This article explores aggravated and exemplary damages in terms of their structure. It argues that the awards are distinguishable and once they have been appropriately analysed it can be seen that aggravated damages have a secure foundation in the private law and are importantly different from other compensatory awards. The article then argues that many of the reasons given in favour of exemplary damages are not consistent with the structure of that award. The article concludes by insisting that exemplary damages should be abolished as they are in serious tension with the nature of civil liability.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信