English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

How does tort law deal with historical injustice? This question appears of increasing relevance since the global quest for the reparation of historical injustices influences tort law. This contribution seeks to offer an answer to it by addressing three sub-questions: (1) how may reparation be claimed, that is, what kind of reparation claims are possible and what problems do they encounter?; (2) why should these claims be sustained, that is, how do they fit in the traditional legitimation patterns of tort law?; and (3) when are they most likely to be sustained, that is, what conditions will enhance their chances of success? In this article I draw on examples from the slavery reparation suits in the US, post-colonial redress cases in the Netherlands, and sexual abuse cases against clergymen (amongst others). I conclude that only under specific circumstances can tort law offer a remedy for historical injustice. Amongst the variables of successful claims are the period of time that has lapsed, the nature of the parties, the remedies claimed, the moral legitimation, and political considerations. This list is not closed, however, since many more cases are to be expected.

How does Tort Law deal with Historical Injustice?: On Slavery Reparations, Post-Colonial Redress, and the Legitimations of Tort Law