Andrew Burrows, ‘Damages and Rights’

This essay looks at three topical aspects of the relationship between damages and rights. The first is the substitutive damages thesis which, it is argued, should be rejected. The second are damages under the Human Rights Act 1998. Here the argument is that the Greenfield case should be departed from: the scale of non-pecuniary loss awards in domestic tort law should be applied by analogy to non-pecuniary loss awards for beach of Convention rights by a public authority under the Human Rights Act 1998. The third are vindicatory damages which, it is submitted, have no place, and should have no place, in English tort law.

Burrows, Andrew Stephen, Damages and Rights (2012). From Donal Nolan and Andrew Robertson (eds), Rights and Private Law (Hart 2012) 275-307.

First posted 2013-06-19 06:47:20

Leave a Reply