不完全正义:部分赔偿的代价

Adil Abdulla
{"title":"不完全正义:部分赔偿的代价","authors":"Adil Abdulla","doi":"10.22329/wyaj.v38.7391","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In the mid-twentieth century, Ontario abandoned a simple, full indemnity costs rule in favour of a discretionary, partial indemnity costs regime with hundreds of sub-rules. This article argues that this was a mistake. Partial indemnity has no doctrinal, principled, or practical benefits that cannot be incorporated into a full costs regime. Additionally, partial indemnity carries significant costs to access to justice. Instead, this article proposes a costs regime that incorporates the best features of both the old rule and the new regime. In brief, it proposes a full indemnity rule; capped at the losing party’s costs; with exceptions for divided success, impecuniosity, and public interest cases; and discretionary fines for engaging in misconduct or dilatory tactics. Collectively, these rules would advance access to justice more than the existing costs regime.","PeriodicalId":56232,"journal":{"name":"Windsor Yearbook of Access to Justice","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-06-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Incomplete Justice: The Costs of Partial Indemnity\",\"authors\":\"Adil Abdulla\",\"doi\":\"10.22329/wyaj.v38.7391\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In the mid-twentieth century, Ontario abandoned a simple, full indemnity costs rule in favour of a discretionary, partial indemnity costs regime with hundreds of sub-rules. This article argues that this was a mistake. Partial indemnity has no doctrinal, principled, or practical benefits that cannot be incorporated into a full costs regime. Additionally, partial indemnity carries significant costs to access to justice. Instead, this article proposes a costs regime that incorporates the best features of both the old rule and the new regime. In brief, it proposes a full indemnity rule; capped at the losing party’s costs; with exceptions for divided success, impecuniosity, and public interest cases; and discretionary fines for engaging in misconduct or dilatory tactics. Collectively, these rules would advance access to justice more than the existing costs regime.\",\"PeriodicalId\":56232,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Windsor Yearbook of Access to Justice\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-06-09\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Windsor Yearbook of Access to Justice\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.22329/wyaj.v38.7391\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Windsor Yearbook of Access to Justice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.22329/wyaj.v38.7391","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在二十世纪中叶,安大略放弃了简单的全额赔偿费用规则,转而采用酌定的部分赔偿费用制度,其中包含数百条子规则。本文认为这是一个错误。部分赔偿没有理论、原则或实际的好处,不能纳入全部成本制度。此外,部分赔偿会给诉诸司法带来巨大成本。相反,本文提出了一种成本制度,它结合了旧制度和新制度的最佳特点。简而言之,它提出了一个全额赔偿规则;以败诉方的费用为上限;除财产分割、财产贫乏和公共利益案件外;对不当行为或拖延战术的酌情罚款。总的来说,这些规则将比现有的费用制度更能促进诉诸司法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Incomplete Justice: The Costs of Partial Indemnity
In the mid-twentieth century, Ontario abandoned a simple, full indemnity costs rule in favour of a discretionary, partial indemnity costs regime with hundreds of sub-rules. This article argues that this was a mistake. Partial indemnity has no doctrinal, principled, or practical benefits that cannot be incorporated into a full costs regime. Additionally, partial indemnity carries significant costs to access to justice. Instead, this article proposes a costs regime that incorporates the best features of both the old rule and the new regime. In brief, it proposes a full indemnity rule; capped at the losing party’s costs; with exceptions for divided success, impecuniosity, and public interest cases; and discretionary fines for engaging in misconduct or dilatory tactics. Collectively, these rules would advance access to justice more than the existing costs regime.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
15
审稿时长
16 weeks
期刊最新文献
Swimming Up Niagara Falls! The Battle to Get Disability Rights Added to the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms The Triumph of the “Therapeutic” in Quebec Courts: Mental Health, Behavioural Reform and the Decline of Rights The Influence of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities on Canadian Jurisprudence in the First Decade Since its Ratification Students in Name Only: Improving the Working Conditions of Articled Students Via the Application of the BC Employment Standards Act People With Disabilities Need Lawyers Too! A Ready-To-Use Plan for Law Schools to Educate Law Students to Effectively Serve the Legal Needs of Clients With Disabilities as Well as Clients Without Disabilities
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1