international social contract unlike that was advocated by John Locke, is a contract between states and international organisation and states inter se. Thus it come into existance through sign various international convention. i.e Genocide Convention.
Futhermore by joining United Nations(UN) Organization and adhere to the rules and principles and objectve of UN as provided under UN charter. By doing such, states curtail their power and vest it upon one powerful organ that could regulate their relations, maintain and restore peace and security in the international community.
Example: Hugo Grotius in explaining the effect of social contract, he said that states are bound to honour their agreement naturally and also all states are equal in international law. [By blogger]
what do you think?, comment and add your viwes now
Featured Posts
The main differences between Torts, Crimes and Breach of Contracts.
1. Torts are legal wrongs against individuals eg. Defamation, Assault and battery.
~Crimes are wrongs agaist the society punishable by the state eg, Murder, Treason and Rape
2. Torts lead the victim to be provided compesation.
~Crimes result into imposing punishment on guilt persons.
3. Torts are pursued as suits in courts of law.
~ Crimes are prosecuted by the state.
4. Torts are mostly creatures of courts eg Negligence, Trespassing and Nuisance.
~ Crimes are creature of the parliament eg, The Penal Code.
The Diffference pointed above do not always come out easily sometimes they are blurred. For instance, while the ;law of torts is expected to award compasation only at times it imposes pun ishments through awards of PUNITIVE DAMAGES. It is more interested to not when one conduct leads to crime and torts. For instance where A without reasonable cause inficted bodily injury to B' Leading to parmanent disfigurement, this would result into A' being held criminal liable under the Penal Code and may also be liable in Tourts in case the victim decided to claim for compasation.
Perpetration of torts and breaches of contract is worthy examining because of their close resemblance.
1. In tort the duty arises from the law.
~ In contract the duty arises from the agreement of the parties.
2.In torts the limitation period is three years.
~ In contract the limitation period is six years
3. In tort reasonable foereseability is applied to determine damages.
~ In contract only laws which arises 'naturally'and which was within reasonable contemplation of the parties is used to determined damages.
~Crimes are wrongs agaist the society punishable by the state eg, Murder, Treason and Rape
2. Torts lead the victim to be provided compesation.
~Crimes result into imposing punishment on guilt persons.
3. Torts are pursued as suits in courts of law.
~ Crimes are prosecuted by the state.
4. Torts are mostly creatures of courts eg Negligence, Trespassing and Nuisance.
~ Crimes are creature of the parliament eg, The Penal Code.
The Diffference pointed above do not always come out easily sometimes they are blurred. For instance, while the ;law of torts is expected to award compasation only at times it imposes pun ishments through awards of PUNITIVE DAMAGES. It is more interested to not when one conduct leads to crime and torts. For instance where A without reasonable cause inficted bodily injury to B' Leading to parmanent disfigurement, this would result into A' being held criminal liable under the Penal Code and may also be liable in Tourts in case the victim decided to claim for compasation.
Perpetration of torts and breaches of contract is worthy examining because of their close resemblance.
1. In tort the duty arises from the law.
~ In contract the duty arises from the agreement of the parties.
2.In torts the limitation period is three years.
~ In contract the limitation period is six years
3. In tort reasonable foereseability is applied to determine damages.
~ In contract only laws which arises 'naturally'and which was within reasonable contemplation of the parties is used to determined damages.
Labels:
Law of Torts
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
