Razonabilidad e incertidumbre en los estándares de diligencia

Authors

  • Diego M. Papayannis Universidad de Girona

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.5347/isonomia.v0i55.471

Keywords:

generic standards of care, indertermination, legal certainty, freedom, personal safety

Abstract

Reasonableness and Uncertainty in Standards of Care

It is a widespread belief that generic standards of care are a major source of uncer-tainty because they are radically indeterminate. In order to promote legal certainty, tort law should eradicate them as far as possible and favor specific standards, expressed in a very precise language. In this paper I argue that generic standards are not as indeterminate as it is usually assumed and that, in addition, they play a fundamental normative role in the practice of tort law by supplementing the precautions required by specific standards, which in turn enhances the protection of personal indemnity.

References

Atiyah, Patrick, 1997: The Damages Lottery. Oxford, Hart Publishing.

Ávila, Humberto, 2012: Teoría de la seguridad jurídica. Madrid-Barcelona, Marcial Pons.

Barros Bourie, Enrique, 2020: Tratado de responsabilidad extracontractual. 2da edición. Santiago, Editorial Jurídica de Chile.

Beever, Alan, 2007: Rediscovering the Law of Negligence. Oxford, Hart Publishing.

Bernstein, Anita, 2002: “The Communities that Make Standards of Care Possible”. Chicago-Kent Law Review,77, pp. 735-769.

Celano, Bruno, 2016: “Pre-conventions. A fragment of the Background”. Revus, 30, pp. 9-32. Citado por la traducción de Vilajosana, J. M. “Preconvenciones. Un fragmento del trasfondo”, en Ramírez Ludeña, L. y Vilajosana, J. M. (eds). Convencionalismo y derecho. Madrid, Marcial Pons.

Cooter, Robert, 1984: “Prices and Sanctions”. Columbia Law Revivew, 84, pp. 1523-1560.

Díez-Picazo, Luis, 2008: El escándalo del daño moral. Madrid, Thomson-Civitas.

Ferrer Beltrán, Jordi, 2021: Prueba sin convicción. Estándares de prueba y debido proceso. Madrid-Barcelona, Marcial Pons.

Gallie, Walter B., 1955: “Essentially Contested Concepts”. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, New Series, 56 (1955 - 1956), pp. 167-198.

Goldberg, John C. y Zipursky, Benjamin C., 2014: “Tort Law and Responsibility”, en Oberdiek, J. (ed). Philosophical Foundations of the Law of Torts. Oxford, Oxford University Press.

Hart, Herbert L. A., 1977: “American Jurisprudence Through English Eyes: The Nightmare And The Noble Dream”. Georgia Law Review, 11(5), pp. 969-989.

__________, 1994: The Concept of Law. 2nd ed. Oxford, Clarendon Press.

Keating, Gregory, 2018: “Is Cost-Benefit Analysis the Only Game in Town?”. Southern California Law Review, 91, pp. 195-261.

Kubica, Maria L., 2021: “La imputación basada en la culpa y la imputación basada en el riesgo”, en Clemente Meoro, M. y Cobas Cobiella, M. E. (dirs.), Tratado de Derecho de daños. Madrid, Tirant lo Blanch, pp. 509-558.

Lifante, Isabel, 2020: “Sobre los conceptos jurídicos indeterminados. Las pautas de conducta y diligencia en el derecho”, en García Rubio, M. P. & Moreso, J. J. (dirs.), Conceptos multidimensionales del derecho. Madrid, Reus, pp. 565-582.

Lucas, John R., 1963: “The Philosophy of the Reasonable Man”. Philosophical Quarterly, 13(51), pp. 97-106.

Marmor, Andrei, 2009: Social Conventions. From Language to Law. Princeton, Princeton University Press.

Mill, John Stuart, 2003: On Liberty (Edited by David Bromwich and George Kateb). New Haven, Yale University Press.

Miller, Alan D. y Perry, Ronen, 2012: “The Reasonable Person”. New York University Law Review, 87(2), pp. 323-392.

Moreso, José Juan, 2001: “Principio de legalidad y causas de justificación (Sobre el alcance de la taxatividad)”. Doxa. Cuadernos de filosofía del derecho, 24, pp. 525-545.

Papayannis, Diego M., 2014: Comprensión y justificación de la responsabilidad extracontractual. Madrid, Marcial Pons.

Priest, George L., 1977: “The Common Law process and the selection of efficient rules”. Journal of Legal Studies, 6 (1), pp. 6582.

Posner, Richard A., 2014: Economic Analysis of Law. Ninth Edition. New York, Woken Kluwer Law & Business.

Rawls, John 1993: Political Liberalism. New York, Columbia University Press.

Raz, Joseph, 1979: The Authority of Law. Oxford, Oxford University Press.

__________, 1986: The Morality of Freedom. Oxford, Oxford University Press.

Schauer, Frederick, 1991: Playing by the Rules. A Philosophical Examination of Rule-Based Decision-Making in Law and in Life. Oxford, Oxford University Press. Citado por la traducción de Orunesu, C. y Rodríguez, J., 2004: Las reglas en juego. Un examen filosófico de la toma de decisiones basada en reglas en el derecho y en la vida cotidiana. Madrid, Marcial Pons.

Schauer, Frederick, 2009: Thinking Like a Lawyer. Cambridge (Mass.), Harvard University Press. Citado por la traducción de Schleider, T., 2013: Pensar como un abogado. Madrid, Marcial Pons.

Shapiro, Scott J., 2011: Legality. Cambridge, Mass., The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press. Citado por la traducción de Papayannis, D. M. y Ramírez Ludeña, L., 2014: Legalidad. Madrid, Marcial Pons.

Weinrib, Ernest, 1995: The Idea of Private Law. Cambridge, Harvard University Press.

Williams, Bernard, 1985: Ethics and the Limits of Philosophy. Londres, Routledge.

Published

2021-12-13

How to Cite

Papayannis, D. M. (2021). Razonabilidad e incertidumbre en los estándares de diligencia. Isonomía - Revista De teoría Y filosofía Del Derecho, (55). https://doi.org/10.5347/isonomia.v0i55.471

Issue

Section

Research Articles