Abstract

This article provides a critical analysis of the main claims of the Austrian school of law and economics on tort liability. It reviews the normative claims of the Austrian school. It identifies the requirements the Austrian achool articultes towards law and which can be described in five points. According to them positive law should be (i) abstract, (ii) simple, (iii) predictable, (iv) should change incrementally, and (v) should reflect the basic informal rules, social expectations. They maintain that in the case of tort liability, a prima facie strict liability would meet these requiremes much better than the negligence rule. The article contests this claim and argues that it is not clear that the strict liability would be more predictable or better suited to informal social rules.

Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call