1.3 Foundation of Tortious Liability and Difference from Other

Liabilities The foundation's theories (why liability at all): Fault — the blame principle: liability for the careless or intentional wrong (the classical default — the "he who faults, answers"); Corrective justice — the wrong's balancing (Aristotle's frame: the loss shifted to the wrongdoer); Distributive justice — the loss's fair spread (the deep-pocket-and-insurance realities); Utilitarianism — the welfare's maximisation (the deterrence's calculus); Economic analysis — the efficiency frame: the cheapest cost avoider; the activity's risk internalised (the enterprise liability theories). The liabilities' differences (the marking table): Face Tortious liability Contractual liability Criminalliability Duty's source Law (fixed by courts) Agreement Law (public) Parties Victim vs. wrongdoer The parties State vs. accused Purpose Compensation Performance's enforcement Punishment Remedy Unliquidated damages Damages (liquidated rule) / specific performance Punishment Consent's role The consent defence's limits The obligation's very source Not a bar The overlaps (the honest close): the same act's double or triple life — the assault as crime AND tort (the parallel proceedings' rule: the criminal prosecution does not bar the civil claim); the contract-tort boundary cases (the duty in contract vs. the duty in law — the concurrent liability debates).