The Function of the Law of Torts

lons3

What do you think the function of the Law of Torts is? Personally I think its purpose is to vindicate rights, step in when the criminal law fails and as a means of corrective justice. :pac:

lons3

Does the law of torts have a function to expand and absorb interests that deserved to recognised and protected as society changes ?

chops018

You must be doing great in college

lons3

chops018 wrote: »

You must be doing great in college

???

chops018

lons3 wrote: »

???

I'm only joking. You seem to be asking nothing but what look like essay questions.

Google is your friend. As is the numerous online resources that your college library will provide, there should be numerous portals to online journals.

SSRN is a good free one.

lons3

Well I am writing an essay? I was hoping to get other peoples views is that not what this site is for? Discussion... Just want to know what other people think because it helps to see stuff from a different vantage point.

chops018

lons3 wrote: »

Well I am writing an essay? I was hoping to get other peoples views is that not what this site is for? Discussion... Just want to know what other people think because it helps to see stuff from a different vantage point.

It does. But, usually the members and moderators don't take too well to doing people's "homework" for them.

I actually think it used to go against to charter to ask homework style questions (I'm not sure if it does anymore).

Well to be honest the only way you will get better at doing them is by making a good plan, doing the research, doing the actual essay as best you can, get feedback from your lecturer, and then try do better the next time from the feedback.

When I was in college I would always make a plan.. even if it was too big or some stuff wasn't relevant it didn't matter, that could all be cut out and the plan be a bit reshaped.

So, normally I would have my introduction, main body part 1-3, maybe more, then conclusion. This is the basic layout of most essays.

I would look to see what the question asks, then I would try get text books, numerous articles - mainly from respected journals, summaries of areas, even Wikipedia articles (if I needed simple explanation on things).



Your question is very broad. It asks what do you think the function of tort law is. I would say nearly every tort book gives some sort of view on this, and in the footnotes they will probably be linked to some sort of article etc. Go from here. This will lead you to even more.

See what else you can do in the main body. An example would be comparing tort to criminal, can they be fused? what are the main differences and why? Loads of stuff will probably be out there on this.

Another area to tackle in the main body; look at other jurisdictions, what is there tort law like, is it similar to here? If not then should we look to be more like them? Criticise/analyse.

Another area of the main body; take one particular tort, negligence, what is its role? Is it a good example of how tort law works?

Conclusion: fairly basic, what you think overall. Agree/disagree etc etc.

Be careful on the vindication of rights area - this is touching on Constitutional borders, which is fine, but if you don't fully understand Constitutional law then I wouldn't be going into a comparative analysis of the two.


As I said, see a tort book and what they say on the matter and go from there. I would be sticking to the civil v criminal argument. You could look at how in a differences between Civil and Criminal trials - I think in a Criminal Trial you have a lot more Constitutional rights available you. Plus the fact that tort is measured on the balance of probabilities and criminal is beyond a reasonable doubt.

Remember, always back up statements and discussion in your footnotes and bibliography with case law, online articles, journals, text books etc. I suggest use Harvard referencing or Oscola if you are doing law. Even if you see ho things are referenced in a law book and copy that format then this would be a decent guide.

If you are in first year and the essay isn't long then the lecturer may want a very basic essay on your understanding of the above. If so then you probably do not need to go into the detail I've said above, and then do what I said and stick to what they say about your question in a tort law book, and add some articles that discuss the matter and maybe do a google and add some website articles on it, or to help add to your own opinion.

lons3

chops018 wrote: »

It does. But, usually the members and moderators don't take too well to doing people's "homework" for them.

I actually think it used to go against to charter to ask homework style questions (I'm not sure if it does anymore).

Well to be honest the only way you will get better at doing them is by making a good plan, doing the research, doing the actual essay as best you can, get feedback from your lecturer, and then try do better the next time from the feedback.

When I was in college I would always make a plan.. even if it was too big or some stuff wasn't relevant it didn't matter, that could all be cut out and the plan be a bit reshaped.

So, normally I would have my introduction, main body part 1-3, maybe more, then conclusion. This is the basic layout of most essays.

I would look to see what the question asks, then I would try get text books, numerous articles - mainly from respected journals, summaries of areas, even Wikipedia articles (if I needed simple explanation on things).



Your question is very broad. It asks what do you think the function of tort law is. I would say nearly every tort book gives some sort of view on this, and in the footnotes they will probably be linked to some sort of article etc. Go from here. This will lead you to even more.

See what else you can do in the main body. An example would be comparing tort to criminal, can they be fused? what are the main differences and why? Loads of stuff will probably be out there on this.

Another area to tackle in the main body; look at other jurisdictions, what is there tort law like, is it similar to here? If not then should we look to be more like them? Criticise/analyse.

Another area of the main body; take one particular tort, negligence, what is its role? Is it a good example of how tort law works?

Conclusion: fairly basic, what you think overall. Agree/disagree etc etc.

Be careful on the vindication of rights area - this is touching on Constitutional borders, which is fine, but if you don't fully understand Constitutional law then I wouldn't be going into a comparative analysis of the two.


As I said, see a tort book and what they say on the matter and go from there. I would be sticking to the civil v criminal argument. You could look at how in a differences between Civil and Criminal trials - I think in a Criminal Trial you have a lot more Constitutional rights available you. Plus the fact that tort is measured on the balance of probabilities and criminal is beyond a reasonable doubt.

Remember, always back up statements and discussion in your footnotes and bibliography with case law, online articles, journals, text books etc. I suggest use Harvard referencing or Oscola if you are doing law. Even if you see ho things are referenced in a law book and copy that format then this would be a decent guide.

If you are in first year and the essay isn't long then the lecturer may want a very basic essay on your understanding of the above. If so then you probably do not need to go into the detail I've said above, and then do what I said and stick to what they say about your question in a tort law book, and add some articles that discuss the matter and maybe do a google and add some website articles on it, or to help add to your own opinion.

Thanks for the advice but i've read a lot of articles and books and written more than a few essays. I just want the opinions of ordinary students, lawyers and academics.

lons3

chops018 wrote: »

It does. But, usually the members and moderators don't take too well to doing people's "homework" for them.

I actually think it used to go against to charter to ask homework style questions (I'm not sure if it does anymore).

Well to be honest the only way you will get better at doing them is by making a good plan, doing the research, doing the actual essay as best you can, get feedback from your lecturer, and then try do better the next time from the feedback.

When I was in college I would always make a plan.. even if it was too big or some stuff wasn't relevant it didn't matter, that could all be cut out and the plan be a bit reshaped.

So, normally I would have my introduction, main body part 1-3, maybe more, then conclusion. This is the basic layout of most essays.

I would look to see what the question asks, then I would try get text books, numerous articles - mainly from respected journals, summaries of areas, even Wikipedia articles (if I needed simple explanation on things).



Your question is very broad. It asks what do you think the function of tort law is. I would say nearly every tort book gives some sort of view on this, and in the footnotes they will probably be linked to some sort of article etc. Go from here. This will lead you to even more.

See what else you can do in the main body. An example would be comparing tort to criminal, can they be fused? what are the main differences and why? Loads of stuff will probably be out there on this.

Another area to tackle in the main body; look at other jurisdictions, what is there tort law like, is it similar to here? If not then should we look to be more like them? Criticise/analyse.

Another area of the main body; take one particular tort, negligence, what is its role? Is it a good example of how tort law works?

Conclusion: fairly basic, what you think overall. Agree/disagree etc etc.

Be careful on the vindication of rights area - this is touching on Constitutional borders, which is fine, but if you don't fully understand Constitutional law then I wouldn't be going into a comparative analysis of the two.


As I said, see a tort book and what they say on the matter and go from there. I would be sticking to the civil v criminal argument. You could look at how in a differences between Civil and Criminal trials - I think in a Criminal Trial you have a lot more Constitutional rights available you. Plus the fact that tort is measured on the balance of probabilities and criminal is beyond a reasonable doubt.

Remember, always back up statements and discussion in your footnotes and bibliography with case law, online articles, journals, text books etc. I suggest use Harvard referencing or Oscola if you are doing law. Even if you see ho things are referenced in a law book and copy that format then this would be a decent guide.

If you are in first year and the essay isn't long then the lecturer may want a very basic essay on your understanding of the above. If so then you probably do not need to go into the detail I've said above, and then do what I said and stick to what they say about your question in a tort law book, and add some articles that discuss the matter and maybe do a google and add some website articles on it, or to help add to your own opinion.

Sorry my last post sounds ungrateful. Thanks for your advice

lons3

chops018 wrote: »

It does. But, usually the members and moderators don't take too well to doing people's "homework" for them.

I actually think it used to go against to charter to ask homework style questions (I'm not sure if it does anymore).

Well to be honest the only way you will get better at doing them is by making a good plan, doing the research, doing the actual essay as best you can, get feedback from your lecturer, and then try do better the next time from the feedback.

When I was in college I would always make a plan.. even if it was too big or some stuff wasn't relevant it didn't matter, that could all be cut out and the plan be a bit reshaped.

So, normally I would have my introduction, main body part 1-3, maybe more, then conclusion. This is the basic layout of most essays.

I would look to see what the question asks, then I would try get text books, numerous articles - mainly from respected journals, summaries of areas, even Wikipedia articles (if I needed simple explanation on things).



Your question is very broad. It asks what do you think the function of tort law is. I would say nearly every tort book gives some sort of view on this, and in the footnotes they will probably be linked to some sort of article etc. Go from here. This will lead you to even more.

See what else you can do in the main body. An example would be comparing tort to criminal, can they be fused? what are the main differences and why? Loads of stuff will probably be out there on this.

Another area to tackle in the main body; look at other jurisdictions, what is there tort law like, is it similar to here? If not then should we look to be more like them? Criticise/analyse.

Another area of the main body; take one particular tort, negligence, what is its role? Is it a good example of how tort law works?

Conclusion: fairly basic, what you think overall. Agree/disagree etc etc.

Be careful on the vindication of rights area - this is touching on Constitutional borders, which is fine, but if you don't fully understand Constitutional law then I wouldn't be going into a comparative analysis of the two.


As I said, see a tort book and what they say on the matter and go from there. I would be sticking to the civil v criminal argument. You could look at how in a differences between Civil and Criminal trials - I think in a Criminal Trial you have a lot more Constitutional rights available you. Plus the fact that tort is measured on the balance of probabilities and criminal is beyond a reasonable doubt.

Remember, always back up statements and discussion in your footnotes and bibliography with case law, online articles, journals, text books etc. I suggest use Harvard referencing or Oscola if you are doing law. Even if you see ho things are referenced in a law book and copy that format then this would be a decent guide.

If you are in first year and the essay isn't long then the lecturer may want a very basic essay on your understanding of the above. If so then you probably do not need to go into the detail I've said above, and then do what I said and stick to what they say about your question in a tort law book, and add some articles that discuss the matter and maybe do a google and add some website articles on it, or to help add to your own opinion.

Actually, when you suggest comparing tort and criminal law etc., do you really think this is a good idea. I was going to do that but then i thought it seemed a bit off topic?

chops018

lons3 wrote: »

Actually, when you suggest comparing tort and criminal law etc., do you really think this is a good idea. I was going to do that but then i thought it seemed a bit off topic?

It depends, it could be seen as off topic, then again it could be seen as great comparative if done well and earn you great credit.

No bother. I assumed you were a first year law student, as most who throw up essay titles usually are, which is why I said I'd give my view on tackling an essay rather than my opinion on the above.

It's been quite a while since I studied academic tort law, so if I was to say something meaningful on the matter then I would have to brush up.

lons3

chops018 wrote: »

It depends, it could be seen as off topic, then again it could be seen as great comparative if done well and earn you great credit.

No bother. I assumed you were a first year law student, as most who throw up essay titles usually are, which is why I said I'd give my view on tackling an essay rather than my opinion on the above.

It's been quite a while since I studied academic tort law, so if I was to say something meaningful on the matter then I would have to brush up.

This is true. I am a first year law student so you assumed correctly but I wasn't looking for the answer. just opinions.
No problem. Thanks anyway

lons3

What about distributive justice ?