Abstract
This article provides a scheme of intelligibility for correlativity, recognising its importance for analytical and normative aspects of legal relations. It considers a variety of types of normative correlativity, investigates the logic of correlativity, and distinguishes three forms of correlation involving legal rights. It undertakes careful re-examination of Aristotelian texts to reveal neglected or misrepresented insights, restores certain Hohfeldian distinctions, and argues for a more complicated relationship between correlativity and reciprocity than previously acknowledged. Specific sections employ the scheme to provide critiques of Weinrib’s use of correlativity in his understanding of private law as corrective justice, and Zylberman’s amalgam of reciprocal correlativity in his non-instrumental view of human rights. A brief concluding section notes the deep asymmetry of law and suggests an understanding of corrective justice based on asymmetry rather than equality. More speculatively, it raises doubts about the core conviction of Kantian thinking on legal and social relationships.
Publisher
Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Reference14 articles.
1. The Idea of Private Law
2. Force and Freedom
3. Finnis, John , “Some Professorial Fallacies about Rights” (1972) 4 Adel L Rev 377;
Cited by
12 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献
1. Rights That;Oxford Journal of Legal Studies;2024-07-04
2. Overcoming von Wright's anxiety;Theoria;2024-04
3. Other People's Liberties;Ratio Juris;2024-02-27
4. Other People’s Liberties;SSRN Electronic Journal;2024
5. The Enigma of Interpersonal Justice in Private Law Theory;Oxford Journal of Legal Studies;2023-07-08