2003Huskie Commons (Northern Illinois University)Open access

Contributory or Comparative: Which is the Optimal Negligence Rule?

Christopher J. Robinette, Paul G. Sherland

Open full text 8 citations

Abstract

In this article, the authors examine whether contributory or some form of comparative negligence is the superior rule based on the goals of tort law. The authors conclude pure comparative negligence is the preferable rule. From a compensation perspective, pure comparative negligence compensates the most tort victims. From a corrective justice perspective, pure comparative negligence, unlike the other rules, requires tortfeasors to correct their wrongs in all cases. Finally, the authors use statistical analyses to determine if any of the rules has a stronger deterrent effect than the others. Based on claims data for automobile accidents in the various jurisdictions, the authors conclude there is no statistically significant difference in the deterrent effect created by any of the rules.

Open-access reader

About this research paper

What this paper is about

In this article, the authors examine whether contributory or some form of comparative negligence is the superior rule based on the goals of tort law. The authors conclude pure comparative negligence is the preferable rule. From a compensation perspective, pure comparative negligence compensates the most tort victims. From a corrective justice perspective, pure comparative negligence, unlike the other rules, requires tortfeasors to correct their wrongs in all cases. Finally, the authors use statistical analyses to determine if any of the rules has a stronger deterrent effect than the others. Based on claims data for automobile accidents in the various jurisdictions, the authors conclude there is no statistically significant difference in the deterrent effect created by any of the rules.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 8 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

In this article, the authors examine whether contributory or some form of comparative negligence is the superior rule based on the goals of tort law. The authors conclude pure comparative negligence is the preferable rule. From a compensation perspective, pure comparative negligence compensates the most tort victims. From a corrective justice perspective, pure comparative negligence, unlike the other rules, requires tortfeasors to correct their wrongs in all cases. Finally, the authors use statistical analyses to determine if any of the rules has a stronger deterrent effect than the others. Based on claims data for automobile accidents in the various jurisdictions, the authors conclude there is no statistically significant difference in the deterrent effect created by any of the rules.

Key concepts: Contributory negligence, Computer science, Law, Tort, Political science, Liability

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Contributory or Comparative: Which is the Optimal Negligence Rule? — Research Paper | ScholarLens