TY - JOUR
T1 - Private Law Exceptionalism? Part I
T2 - A Basic Difficulty with the Structural Arguments from Bipolarity and Civil Recourse
AU - Dorfman, Avihay
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2015, Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht.
PY - 2016/4/1
Y1 - 2016/4/1
N2 - Contemporary discussions of private law theory have sought to divine the deep structure and content of private law by reference to two key distinctions. First, the distinction between private and criminal law has been utilized to flesh out the distinctively bipolar structure of private law (and its various departments, namely, property, contract, torts, and unjust enrichment). Second, the distinction between formal and distributive equality has served to highlight the special terms of interaction established in private law. In these pages, I take up the former distinction, arguing that its theoretical significance is overdrawn. I argue that it does not succeed in identifying private law’s precise nature.
AB - Contemporary discussions of private law theory have sought to divine the deep structure and content of private law by reference to two key distinctions. First, the distinction between private and criminal law has been utilized to flesh out the distinctively bipolar structure of private law (and its various departments, namely, property, contract, torts, and unjust enrichment). Second, the distinction between formal and distributive equality has served to highlight the special terms of interaction established in private law. In these pages, I take up the former distinction, arguing that its theoretical significance is overdrawn. I argue that it does not succeed in identifying private law’s precise nature.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84959245930&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1007/s10982-015-9250-0
DO - 10.1007/s10982-015-9250-0
M3 - ???researchoutput.researchoutputtypes.contributiontojournal.article???
AN - SCOPUS:84959245930
SN - 0167-5249
VL - 35
SP - 165
EP - 191
JO - Law and Philosophy
JF - Law and Philosophy
IS - 2
ER -