Concept of Corrective Justice: Meaning and Analysis
Concept of Corrective Justice: Meaning and Analysis
What is Corrective Justice?
Corrective Justice is a principle of justice that concerns the rectification of wrongs or harms done by one party to another. It is focused on restoring fairness by correcting an imbalance caused by an unjust act, typically through compensation or reparation.
It arises in private disputes where one person has been wrongfully harmed by another.
The goal is to “correct” or reverse the unfair advantage gained by the wrongdoer and restore the injured party to their original position as far as possible.
Core Idea
The principle is rooted in the belief that if a person wrongfully harms another, they must make amends.
The harm causes an imbalance in the relationship between the parties, and justice demands restoring the balance.
Analysis
1. Relationship Between Parties
Corrective justice is bilateral — it involves two parties: the wrongdoer and the injured party.
It is concerned with the specific injustice between these two, rather than broader social issues.
2. Nature of the Wrong
The wrong is often a civil wrong or tort, such as negligence, trespass, or breach of contract.
The focus is on actual harm caused and compensation for that harm.
3. Restorative Mechanism
Corrective justice requires the wrongdoer to compensate the victim — usually financially.
The compensation is meant to place the injured party in the position they would have been but for the wrong.
Key Theorist
Aristotle first articulated the idea in his Nicomachean Ethics, stating justice involves “restoring equality” when it has been disturbed by wrongdoing.
Case Law Illustrating Corrective Justice
1. Donoghue v. Stevenson (1932)
Facts: A consumer fell ill after drinking a ginger beer that contained a decomposed snail.
Application: The court recognized the manufacturer's duty to avoid causing harm to consumers.
Corrective Justice Aspect: The manufacturer’s wrongful act caused injury to the consumer, and the consumer was entitled to compensation to restore her position.
2. Rylands v. Fletcher (1868)
Facts: The defendant’s reservoir burst, flooding the plaintiff’s mine.
Application: The defendant was held liable for the damage.
Corrective Justice Aspect: The defendant wrongfully caused damage, and the law required compensation to correct the loss.
3. Vaughan v. Taff Vale Railway Co. (1879)
Facts: The railway company negligently allowed a fire to spread to the plaintiff's property.
Application: The court held the company liable.
Corrective Justice Aspect: Compensation was required to restore the plaintiff’s property value.
Distinction from Distributive Justice
| Corrective Justice | Distributive Justice |
|---|---|
| Concerned with rectifying specific wrongs | Concerned with fair allocation of resources in society |
| Bilateral between two parties | Involves society or the state as a whole |
| Focus on compensation for harm | Focus on fairness in societal arrangements |
Summary
Corrective Justice is about rectifying private wrongs through compensation.
It aims to restore balance between parties disturbed by harm.
Courts use corrective justice principles to award damages and correct injustices.
It applies mainly in tort and contract law where harm has occurred.
The underlying value is fairness and restitution, not punishment.
RELATED Blog
0 comments