Law and Morality Flashcards
What is the difference between law and morality?
Law:A system of rules created by the state that is enforced by institutions like the courts and police. Breaches result in sanctions (e.g. fines and imprisonment)
Morality:A set of principles based on what is perceived as right or wrong, often influenced by religion, culture and societal norms. It is not legally enforceable but is important for guiding human conduct and ethics.
What was Jeremy Bentham’s key ideas, law vs morality and its relevance to tort law?
-Law should aim to maximise happiness and prevent harm, ensuring the welfare of the majority.
-Morality should be subjective, and the law should intervene to prevent harm but not enforce moral codes if they do not affect others’ well-being.
-Tort Law often balances individual freedom with the duty to prevent harm (e.g. negligence and occupiers’ liability)
What is John Austin’s key ideas, law vs morality and its relevance to tort law?
-Law is a command from a sovereign authority and must be obeyed, regardless of morality.
-The law is valid as long as it comes from an authorised source, even if it contradicts moral principles.
-Tort law must follow legally established principles and rules, regardless of any moral considerations. Austin’s perspective would align with strict liability in tort.
What were Hart’s key ideas, law vs morality and its relevancy in tort law?
-They are distinct but can influence each other. Law is valid due to social acceptance and the rule of law, not because they are morally just.
-The law should not attempt to enforce personal morals but should only intervene when someone’s freedom is harmed.
-Hart’s theory is reflected in cases like Donoghue v Stevenson, where the duty of care was rooted in protecting individuals from harm, reflecting a moral concern for the well-being of others.
What was Joseph Raz’ key ideas, law vs morality and its relevancy in tort law?
-legal positivist
-The authority of law comes from its ability to maintain social order, independent of personal morality.
-The law should be morally neutral but aim to promote social order. Morality cannot justify laws that disrupt this order.
-Vicarious liability in tort law reflects the legal authority in attributing responsibility to others in a clear manner, regardless of personal morality.
What is Hans Kelsen’s key idea, law vs morality and relevancy in tort law?
-Law is a system of norms, separate from morality. Morality cannot justify/invalidate law.
-Law is a norm system based on a basic norm (Grundnorm) and should be separated from morality.
-Kelsen’s theory reflects how strict liability torts are applied regardless of any moral consideration-just as long as the action causes harm.
What were Thomas Aquinas’ key ideas, law vs morality and its relevancy to tort law?
-theory on natural law
-Laws should reflect natural moral order; if not, they are not true laws.
-Laws that do not align with natural law (moral principles) are unjust and lack legitimacy.
-Tort law’s emphasis on duty of care and fairness (e.g. Bolam v Friern Hospital), can be seen as reflecting moral obligations to prevent harm to others.
What is Lon Fuller’s key ideas, law vs morality and its relevancy to tort law?
-Law must be moral in its structure (clarity, fairness). Unjust laws are not true laws.
-A valid law must satisfy an inner morality that includes clear rules, consistency and fairness.
-The duty of care in tort law reflects Fuller’s moral standard-laws must protect the fair treatment of individuals.
What was the relevance to law and morality in Donoghue v Stevenson (1932)?
-Mrs Donoghue consumed a ginger beer that contained a dead snail and felt ill. She sued the manufacturer for negligence.
-The case established the neighbour principle from Lord Atkin, which reflects a moral duty to care for others safety and well-being.
-Shows how tort law is grounded in moral obligations not to harm others
What was the relevance to law and morality in Bolam v Friern Hospital (1957)?
-A patient sued a hospital for negligence after undergoing a procedure without sufficient warning of risks.
-The court used the professional standard of care- a moral principle of responsibility within the healthcare profession.
-Demonstrates how moral obligations shape tort law, balancing individual rights and public safety.
What was the relevance to law and morality in Alcock v Chief Constable (1991)?
-Claimants sought damages for psychiatric harm suffered after witnessing the Hillsborough disaster.
-This case demonstrates limits to moral sympathy, as the law must balance emotional harm with certainty and policy.
-Shows how moral values (sympathy for victims) are limited by the need for legal clarity and certainty (rules for psychiatric harm claims).
What is the Duty of Care in Tort Law?
-In Donoghue v Stevenson,the law established a moral duty not to harm others, and this principle governs tort law.
-Tort Law reflects society’s moral views by imposing liability on those who cause harm.
What is Vicarious Liability and its relevance to Tort law?
-Tort law assigns liability to employers for employees’ actions.
-Reflects a moral obligation for employers to be responsible for employees’ harmful actions.
How is the law on negligence relevant to law and morality?
-The ‘reasonable person test’ represents a moral baseline for how people should act in everyday life to avoid causing harm.
What are the pros of Law Enforcing Morality?
-Promotes justice and fairness in society (e.g., protecting vulnerable people)
-Law can reflect societal moral standards (e.g., anti-discrimination laws)
What are the cons of Law Enforcing Morality?
-Conflict between different moral views (e.g., abortion, euthanasia)
-Legal paternalism: forcing morality on individuals (e.g., laws against consensual activities)
-Risk of oppression of minority views or cultures
Conclusion: Law and Morality Relationship
Law and morality are interdependent in many ways , especially in tort law, where moral obligations such as duty of care and fairness influence legal rules.
-However, while law reflects morality, it cannot enforce every moral principle due to legal consistency and practical limits.
