Hohfeld's Logic of Legal Rights Flashcards
What is the Hohfeldian view of rights concerned with?
Hohfeld’s view of rights focuses on understanding the different types of legal rights and how they logically relate in a specific way to their ‘jural’ opposites
What did Hohfeld seek to clarify?
He sought to clarify the proposition that a person has the right to do something.
What did he say in support of the theory?
He maintained that each type of right was one aspect of a legal relationship between two parties.
What four types of right did he put forward?
Claim-right; liberties; powers; immunities
What is present along with his four types of rights?
Correlatives which are imposed (or not) on the other person in the jural relationship.
What corresponds to a claim-right?
A duty
Demonstrate a claim-right and corresponding duty
If A has a legal right against B, then B has a legal duty to A.
What does the essence of Hohfeld’s analysis rely on?
The recognition of this relationship between claim-rights and duties. It is central to understanding the dynamics of legal relationships and the reciprocal obligations that form the basis of legal systems.
What corresponds to a liberty?
The absence of a right
Demonstrate a liberty
If A has a privilege to do C, B then has no right against A.
How does a liberty exist?
A liberty exists solely in the absence of a duty owed to the other party, and the other party’s lack of any claim-right against the right-holder.
What does Kant say about rights?
Kant views rights as internally complex.
What does Kant say about liberties (or the privilege to do X)
Kant proposes that a duty is not violated in the performance of a certain action, and others are under a duty not to interfere.
How does Hohfeld’s view contrast to Kant’s view of a duty not to interfere?
Hohfeld views the duty not to interfere as a consequence of a claim-right, for example the right not to be assaulted.
What is a power?
The ability to alter legal rights or duties, or legal relations generally.
How do powers differ from claim-rights?
They do not impose a duty on anyone else.
What is a power correlative to?
Liabilities, i.e., the other party is liable to have his legal situation altered by an exercise of power.
How do powers differ from liberties?
One may have the power to do something, but not have the liberty to do so.
What is an immunity?
If a person has an immunity from something, it follows that they are not under a liability to have their legal situation altered by the act of another.
What type of contribution did Hohfeld make to the theory of rights?
Semantic.
What is of ‘immeasurable value’ to our understanding of the logic of rights?
His detailed vocabulary.
What would happen without Hohfeld’s detailed vocabulary?
The lack of distinction between each of the four types of right would lead to contradictory situations where one may possess the right to do something while simultaneously not having the right to do something.
What did Kant feel about legal reasoning compared to Hohfeld?
Kant was concerned with the idea that legal reasoning was based on working out the internal logic of rights, whereas Hohfeld suggests that the internal complexity of legal rights is a consequence of using the word ‘right’ when considering the four distinct categories set out.
Do Raz and McCormick discriminate between various forms of rights?
No, and their theories are often held to acclaim as being a more dynamic approach to rights within a legal system.
Why do you prefer Hohfeld’s analysis?
Hohfeld’s analysis gives a deeper insight into legal reasoning and how rather than being informed by the concept of a mere ‘right’, they are matters of judgment informed by many considerations of justice and the common good.
Why is Hohfeld’s analysis the more logical approach?
It is more logical compared to Kant, Raz and McCormick as it allows for a better understanding of the complexities of the legal system as a whole.
