What is it about?
This study demonstrates first that perpetrators of personal injury incidents provide less comprehensive apologies than victims desire. Second, it shows that this lack of apology comprehensiveness undermines victims’ forgiveness.
Featured Image
Why is it important?
Apologies are assumed to be an effective pathway to the restoration of victims of torts. Accordingly, initiatives to facilitate their provision in legal contexts are currently being advocated. This study shows that the apologies that perpetrators provide in these contexts do not always live up to such expectations and explains why not.
Perspectives
The study shows that subjectiveness in victims’ and perpetrators’ perception of torts may undermine the remedial effectiveness of legal apology. Perpetrators perceive torts differently from victims, such that perpetrators regard their transgressions as less severe and intentional, and themselves as less blameworthy than victims do, and consequently offer less comprehensive apologies than victims desire.
Prof. dr. Peter Mascini
Erasmus Universiteit Rotterdam
Read the Original
This page is a summary of: Rethinking Apology in Tort Litigation Deficiencies in Comprehensiveness Undermine Remedial Effectiveness, Review of Law & Economics, February 2019, De Gruyter,
DOI: 10.1515/rle-2018-0042.
You can read the full text:
Contributors
The following have contributed to this page
