Punitive Damages – A Modern Conundrum of Ancient Origin
The problem of punitive damages in tort law besets many modern legal systems, especially those belonging to the English common law tradition. It raises a number of the most fundamental questions: the aims and functions of punishment, those of delictual (tortious) liability, and generally the relatio...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Journal of European tort law 2012-04, Vol.3 (1), p.1-20 |
---|---|
1. Verfasser: | |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 20 |
---|---|
container_issue | 1 |
container_start_page | 1 |
container_title | Journal of European tort law |
container_volume | 3 |
creator | Englard, Izhak |
description | The problem of punitive damages in tort law besets many modern legal systems, especially those belonging to the English common law tradition. It raises a number of the most fundamental questions: the aims and functions of punishment, those of delictual (tortious) liability, and generally the relationship between public (criminal) law and private law; and all that on the background of constitutional principles. No wonder that, in a series of recent decisions of the US Supreme Court, dissent was common and as a foreseeable reaction lengthy, learned academic articles appeared in the law reviews. The present author could not resist proffering an additional one, in the hope that a number of historical and comparative aspects might be of interest in the ongoing discussion. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1515/jetl-2012-0001 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_1514305187</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>3271116991</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c2321-b3cbb24e0b1584e5b8a3b37c61ed1a3ac3e5bb9378106ee6a7e110851a48de9f3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNptkM1OwzAQhC0EElXplbMlzileO06cY1V-ilRUDnC27GRTpWqdYieg3ngH3pAnwVER4sBpR6tvZrVDyCWwKUiQ1xvstglnwBPGGJyQEahMJUXG2emvBn5OJiFsIsHSAqRiI1I89a7pmjekN2Zn1hjo18cnndHHtkLv6Lx1vat8v6NtTWeubNB1dOWbdeMuyFlttgEnP3NMXu5un-eLZLm6f5jPlknJBYfEitJaniKz8WCK0iojrMjLDLACI0wp4s4WIlfAMsTM5AjAlASTqgqLWozJ1TF379vXHkOnN23vXTyp4-epYBJUHqnpkSp9G4LHWu99szP-oIENnNRDQ3poSA8NRUNxNLybbYe-wrXvD1H8Sf_fCCC-AR9Ta54</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1514305187</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Punitive Damages – A Modern Conundrum of Ancient Origin</title><source>HeinOnline Law Journal Library</source><source>De Gruyter journals</source><creator>Englard, Izhak</creator><creatorcontrib>Englard, Izhak</creatorcontrib><description>The problem of punitive damages in tort law besets many modern legal systems, especially those belonging to the English common law tradition. It raises a number of the most fundamental questions: the aims and functions of punishment, those of delictual (tortious) liability, and generally the relationship between public (criminal) law and private law; and all that on the background of constitutional principles. No wonder that, in a series of recent decisions of the US Supreme Court, dissent was common and as a foreseeable reaction lengthy, learned academic articles appeared in the law reviews. The present author could not resist proffering an additional one, in the hope that a number of historical and comparative aspects might be of interest in the ongoing discussion.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1868-9612</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1868-9620</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1515/jetl-2012-0001</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Berlin: Walter de Gruyter GmbH & Co. KG</publisher><ispartof>Journal of European tort law, 2012-04, Vol.3 (1), p.1-20</ispartof><rights>2012 by Walter de Gruyter Berlin Boston</rights><rights>Copyright Walter de Gruyter GmbH Apr 2012</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c2321-b3cbb24e0b1584e5b8a3b37c61ed1a3ac3e5bb9378106ee6a7e110851a48de9f3</citedby></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.degruyter.com/document/doi/10.1515/jetl-2012-0001/pdf$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwalterdegruyter$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.degruyter.com/document/doi/10.1515/jetl-2012-0001/html$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwalterdegruyter$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925,66754,68538</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Englard, Izhak</creatorcontrib><title>Punitive Damages – A Modern Conundrum of Ancient Origin</title><title>Journal of European tort law</title><description>The problem of punitive damages in tort law besets many modern legal systems, especially those belonging to the English common law tradition. It raises a number of the most fundamental questions: the aims and functions of punishment, those of delictual (tortious) liability, and generally the relationship between public (criminal) law and private law; and all that on the background of constitutional principles. No wonder that, in a series of recent decisions of the US Supreme Court, dissent was common and as a foreseeable reaction lengthy, learned academic articles appeared in the law reviews. The present author could not resist proffering an additional one, in the hope that a number of historical and comparative aspects might be of interest in the ongoing discussion.</description><issn>1868-9612</issn><issn>1868-9620</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2012</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNptkM1OwzAQhC0EElXplbMlzileO06cY1V-ilRUDnC27GRTpWqdYieg3ngH3pAnwVER4sBpR6tvZrVDyCWwKUiQ1xvstglnwBPGGJyQEahMJUXG2emvBn5OJiFsIsHSAqRiI1I89a7pmjekN2Zn1hjo18cnndHHtkLv6Lx1vat8v6NtTWeubNB1dOWbdeMuyFlttgEnP3NMXu5un-eLZLm6f5jPlknJBYfEitJaniKz8WCK0iojrMjLDLACI0wp4s4WIlfAMsTM5AjAlASTqgqLWozJ1TF379vXHkOnN23vXTyp4-epYBJUHqnpkSp9G4LHWu99szP-oIENnNRDQ3poSA8NRUNxNLybbYe-wrXvD1H8Sf_fCCC-AR9Ta54</recordid><startdate>201204</startdate><enddate>201204</enddate><creator>Englard, Izhak</creator><general>Walter de Gruyter GmbH & Co. KG</general><general>Walter de Gruyter GmbH</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope></search><sort><creationdate>201204</creationdate><title>Punitive Damages – A Modern Conundrum of Ancient Origin</title><author>Englard, Izhak</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c2321-b3cbb24e0b1584e5b8a3b37c61ed1a3ac3e5bb9378106ee6a7e110851a48de9f3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2012</creationdate><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Englard, Izhak</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><jtitle>Journal of European tort law</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Englard, Izhak</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Punitive Damages – A Modern Conundrum of Ancient Origin</atitle><jtitle>Journal of European tort law</jtitle><date>2012-04</date><risdate>2012</risdate><volume>3</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>1</spage><epage>20</epage><pages>1-20</pages><issn>1868-9612</issn><eissn>1868-9620</eissn><abstract>The problem of punitive damages in tort law besets many modern legal systems, especially those belonging to the English common law tradition. It raises a number of the most fundamental questions: the aims and functions of punishment, those of delictual (tortious) liability, and generally the relationship between public (criminal) law and private law; and all that on the background of constitutional principles. No wonder that, in a series of recent decisions of the US Supreme Court, dissent was common and as a foreseeable reaction lengthy, learned academic articles appeared in the law reviews. The present author could not resist proffering an additional one, in the hope that a number of historical and comparative aspects might be of interest in the ongoing discussion.</abstract><cop>Berlin</cop><pub>Walter de Gruyter GmbH & Co. KG</pub><doi>10.1515/jetl-2012-0001</doi><tpages>20</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 1868-9612 |
ispartof | Journal of European tort law, 2012-04, Vol.3 (1), p.1-20 |
issn | 1868-9612 1868-9620 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_journals_1514305187 |
source | HeinOnline Law Journal Library; De Gruyter journals |
title | Punitive Damages – A Modern Conundrum of Ancient Origin |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-30T17%3A34%3A28IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Punitive%20Damages%20%E2%80%93%20A%20Modern%20Conundrum%20of%20Ancient%20Origin&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20European%20tort%20law&rft.au=Englard,%20Izhak&rft.date=2012-04&rft.volume=3&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=1&rft.epage=20&rft.pages=1-20&rft.issn=1868-9612&rft.eissn=1868-9620&rft_id=info:doi/10.1515/jetl-2012-0001&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E3271116991%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1514305187&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true |