To Inspect and Make Safe: On the Morally Responsible Liability of Property Owners
- First Online:
- 136 Downloads
There is currently a stalemate over the correct approach to legal liability. To take a prominent example, it remains a point of contention whether land owners should be held liable for injuries to trespassers. Many of those who insist that land owners should be held liable for injuries to trespassers maintain this for purely economic or pragmatic reasons. In contrast, those on the other side frequently defend their view on the grounds that, in such trespass cases, owners are not morally responsible for the injuries. We maintain that the best way forward for all parties in this debate is to recognize the existence of “morally responsible liability”—of cases where owners qua owners are morally responsible for damages caused by their property. Once this is recognized, the debate can be framed in terms of whether there are economic or pragmatic reasons for legal liability to diverge from morally responsible liability. Unfortunately, there is no good account of morally responsible liability in the literature. Taking lessons from the failings of the few extant accounts, we draw on the work of A. M. Honoré and Jeremy Waldron to develop an account of our own. We argue that owners are morally responsible for damages caused by their property when and because their taking ownership of something leads to increased risk to others. We explain how and why such increases in risk come about, and how our account captures our intuitions concerning various cases, including those concerning injuries to trespassers.
KeywordsDuty of care Liability Moral responsibility Property rights Risk
- Breakey, Hugh (2013). Property Concepts. In The internet encyclopedia of philosophy, http://www.iep.utm.edu/prop-con/.
- Coleman, J, Mendlow G (2010). Theories of Tort Law. In: Zalta EN (ed), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2010 Edition), http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2010/entries/tort-theories/.
- Cupp RL Jr, (2010) In praise of moral judgment: the restatement (Third) of torts and flagrant ‘bad guy’ trespassers. Wake For Law Rev Forum 1:37–44Google Scholar
- Donoghue (or McAlister) v Stevenson (1932) All ER Rep 1; (1932) AC 562; House of LordsGoogle Scholar
- Goldberg JCP, Zipursky BC (2007) Tort law and moral luck. Cornell Law Rev 92:1123–1176Google Scholar
- Honoré AM (2006) Property and ownership: Marginal comments. In: Endicott T, Getzler J, Peel E (eds) Properties in law: Essays in honour of Jim Harris. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 129–137Google Scholar
- Honoré AM (1999) Responsibility and fault. Hart Publishing, OxfordGoogle Scholar
- Honoré AM (1961) Ownership. In: Guest AG (ed) Oxford essays in jurisprudence: First series. Clarendon, Oxford, pp 107–147Google Scholar
- MacPherson v. Buick Motor Co. (1916) 161 AD 906 145 NYS 1132 1914 NY App DivGoogle Scholar
- Ripstein A (2001) Private law and private narratives. In: Cane P, Honoré T, Gardner JB (eds) Relating to responsibility: Essays in honour of tony honoré on his 80th birthday. Hart Publishing, Oxford, pp 37–60Google Scholar
- Rowland v. Christian (1968) 69 Cal.2d 108, 70 Cal.Rptr. 97, 443 P.2d 561Google Scholar
- Siddons v. Business Properties Development Co. (1998) 191 Ariz. 158, 953 P.2d 902Google Scholar
- Tawney RH (1978) The sickness of an acquisitive society. In: Macpherson CB (ed) Property: Mainstream and critical positions. Basil Blackwell Press, Oxford, pp 133–152Google Scholar
- Waldron J (1988) The right to private property. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar