Preponderance, proportionality, stepwise liability

Giovanni Tuzet, Fabrizio Esposito

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

After comparing the preponderance and proportional approaches to adjudication by considering some cases susceptible to being decided in either way, the work develops an in-depth discussion of Lavie's stepwise approach, and points out some major concerns that it poses, namely concerns about conceptual resources, methodology and matters of principle. As to conceptual resources, the work addresses and clarifies what Lavie means by ‘probability’ and ‘gradually increasing steps’; on methodology, it observes that reliance on Beckerian deterrence in this context is not convincing due to its reductionist motivational focus, which has also been challenged empirically by behavioural studies, and to its dismissal of the institutional function of trials; on matters of principle, finally, the work claims that the fundamental changes in the jural positions of claimant and defendant raise very high concerns in terms of the right to a fair trial.

Original languageEnglish
JournalInternational Journal of Evidence and Proof
DOIs
Publication statusAccepted/In press - 2023

Keywords

  • deterrence
  • fair trial
  • preponderance
  • proportionality
  • stepwise liability
  • uncertainty

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Preponderance, proportionality, stepwise liability'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this