Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 4 views

    Administration of Justice - New

    Uploaded by

    KAINAT KHAN

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Administration of Justice - New

    Uploaded by

    KAINAT KHAN
    4 views1 page

    Original Title

    Administration of Justice.new

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    4 views1 page

    Administration of Justice - New

    Uploaded by

    KAINAT KHAN

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    of 1

    QUAID-E-AZAM LAW COLLEGE LAHORE

    LLB-I Philosophy of Law


    Session 22-23 Prof. Nafeer A. Malik

    THE ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE

    DIFFERENCE BETWEEN ADMINISTRATION OF CIVIL, AND CRIMINAL JUSTICE


    1. Salmond’s view that in civil justice the plaintiff claims a right and given such remedy
    as he asks (such as repayment, damages, specific performance, etc); while in criminal
    justice punishment is awarded without reference to the wishes of the person injured.
    This distinction is not sound, for in certain crimes, the wrong –doer may not be punished
    at all if the injured one so desires, e.g. adultery [Under the English Law]. Again the
    nature of the remedy applied is not the basis of distinction, for example in some civil
    cases the damages awarded may be so severe as to be punitive. The object may be not
    only to compensate the sufferer but as to punish the wrong-doer.
    2. Austin’s view is that in cases of civil injuries, the person injured is compensated (an
    effort is made to put him in the same position in which he would have been as if the
    right had not been breached) while in crimes the wrong-doer is punished and the injured
    one gets nothing. This distinction also proceeds on the basis of the remedy awarded and
    is not sound like number 1 above. It may also be noted that in some civil injuries the
    damages awarded are far in excess of the amount that would restore the person wronged
    to his old position.
    3. Blackstone’s view is that civil wrongs are private wrongs and crimes are public wrongs.
    A public wrong is a wrong committed against the State or the community at large, for
    which the state would initiate proceedings. A private wrong is infringement of rights of
    an individual, for which the person wronged only suffers and he alone institutes
    proceedings as he wishes. This distinction is unsound, for (1) all wrongs against the
    public are not crimes. e.g. a refusal to pay tax causes loss to the community, yet it is no
    crime (ii) all crimes are not public wrongs e.g. if A steals Rs. 100/- from B, the
    community as a whole does not suffer, for what one member of the community has
    suffered the other has gained: (iii) proceeding s for certain crimes are started at the
    instance of the injured one only e.g. adultery: and for most crimes proceedings may be
    started by the individual by means of a compliant. On the other hand for certain civil
    wrongs the individual may not be able to start proceedings e.g. proceedings for breach
    of public trust or public nuisance though civil are started by the Attorney General: (iv)
    The same act may be crime as also a wrong e.g. defamation is a crime as also a tort.
    4. Prof. Kenny’s view is that in civil wrongs the sanction is remitted by the individual
    while in crimes the sanction can be remitted, if at all, by the State alone. In crimes it is
    for the Sate to say whether it will have the criminal punished or not, e.g. in murder the
    wrong – doer will be punished even if the heirs of the victim do not wish to prosecute
    him; if he can be saved at all, it is the State alone that can save him by not prosecuting
    him or withdrawing the prosecution (the state in such cases is said to enter the plea of
    Nolle prosequi: “I will not prosecute”) [Under the English Law]. In civil wrongs, the
    injured one may or may not sue. This distinction seems to be the most sound one.

    You might also like