No-Fault Compensation and Unlocking Tort Law’s: ‘Reciprocal Normative Embrace’
Wall, Jesse

View/ Open
Cite this item:
Wall, J. (2016). No-Fault Compensation and Unlocking Tort Law’s: ‘Reciprocal Normative Embrace’. New Zealand Universities Law Review, 27(1), 125-144.
Permanent link to OUR Archive version:
http://hdl.handle.net/10523/9142
Abstract:
The purpose of this article is to explain how the principle of corrective justice has been displaced by the provision of no-fault compensation for personal injuries. In explaining the transition from tort liability for personal injuries to no-fault compensation, the aim is to identify the norms that are adhered to, and the norms that are abandoned, under either scheme. The explanation unfolds through three sections. Section 2 examines the principled basis for a no-fault compensation scheme that is formulated in the Woodhouse Report. Section 3 then turns to consider how, in the absence of a no-fault compensation scheme, the principle of corrective justice imposes an agent-relative duty of reparation on those responsible for causing a wrongful loss. Section 4 then considers how the duty of reparation can be discharged by a third party when we reconfigure our conception of “wrongful loss’’ and considers the implications of the reconfiguration for the fault principle. Viewing the transition from tort law actions to no-fault compensation in this way enables us to appreciate how a “normatively significant connection between actions and their outcomes ” is severed through the reconfiguration of “wrongful loss.”
Date:
2016
Publisher:
Thomson Reuters
Pages:
125-144
Keywords:
Tort law; Corrective justice; Personal injury; ACC; The Woodhouse Report; New Zealand
Research Type:
Journal Article
Languages:
English
Collections
- Journal Article [918]
- Law Collection [582]