MID-SEMESTER EXAM Flashcards
(17 cards)
What happened in the Case of the Speluncean Explorers?
- Five explorers trapped by landslide with limited food
- 20 days later, told rescue would occur in (minimum) 10 more days
- Whetmore suggests cannibalism; others agree
- Whetmore changes mind but overruled, killed, and eaten
- Survivors charged with murder under clear statute
What was Truepenny CJ’s decision & reasoning in the Speluncean Explorers case?
- Plain meaning interpretation
- Statute unambiguous; must be applied despite personal views
- Clemency is for the executive, not judiciary
- Suggested joint petition for clemency
- Decision: Affirms convictions but recommends clemency
What was Foster J’s first argument & decision in the Speluncean Explorers case?
- State of nature: Newgarth’s laws do not apply
- Laws of nature permit sacrificing one to save others
- Positive law based on men’s coexistence in society
- Decision: Sets aside convictions
What was Foster J’s second argument & decision in the Speluncean Explorers case?
- Purposive interpretation: Exception to law by implication
- Principal purpose of criminal law (deterrence) not served
- Cites Commonwealth v. Staymore
- Decision: Sets aside convictions
What was Tatting J’s decision & reasoning in the Speluncean Explorers case?
- Critiques Foster’s natural law and purposive approach
- Natural law prioritizing contract over life is absurd
- Purposive interpretation difficult with multiple purposes
- Conflicting rationales; cannot decide case
- Decision: Withdraws from case and makes no decision
What was Keen J’s decision & reasoning in the Speluncean Explorers case?
- Criticises appeal for clemency; separation of powers
- Moral considerations irrelevant in applying statute
- Criticises other judges for failing to distinguish the legal from the moral aspects of the case
- Opposes liberal purposive interpretation
- Prefers legislative supremacy
- Decision: Affirms convictions
What was Handy J’s decision & reasoning in the Speluncean Explorers case?
- Public opinion and “common sense” considered
- Aware that 90% public want lesser punishment or release
- Heard rumours that Chief Executive won’t commute sentence
- Question of practical wisdom over abstract theory
- Forms as instruments for proper results
- Decision: Sets aside convictions
What happened in Commonwealth v. Staymore?
cited by Foster J in Speluncean Explorers case
- Conviction Details: Defendant was convicted under a statute making it a crime to leave one’s car parked in certain areas for a period longer than 2 hours.
- Attempt to Comply: Defendant had attempted to remove his car but was prevented from doing so because the streets were obstructed by a political demonstration. He was not part of the demonstration and had no reason to anticipate it.
- Court Decision: His conviction was set aside by the Court, even though his case fell squarely within the wording of the statute.
Which judge’s approach does the author (Lon Fuller) agree with in the Speluncean Explorers case?
Foster J
How does Jim describe Bentham’s approach to legal philosophy.
Jim says that Bentham is like a martian. He analyses and critiques legal systems from a detached, universal viewpoint. Bentham’s goal is to establish principles that could theoretically apply to any legal system in the world, guided by the overarching aim of maximising happiness and minimising pain
Describe Bentham’s Command Theory of Law
Posits that laws are essentially commands used by sovereign authority, and they are only obeyed as they are backed by the threat of punishment.
Bentham suggests that epople follow laws not necessary becuase they believe in their moral righteousness, but because they have been conditioned to do so (i.e. habitual obedience)
Jim compares habitual obedience to training a dog. Consistency is key. If you only punish bad behavior sometimes, the training won’t stick. The same goes for laws: their power comes from the predictable enforcement of consequences
How does Bentham’s command theory fit into his broader utilitarian philosophy?
Bentham’s command theory frames laws as tools to regulate behaviour in a way that maximises social utility. The effectiveness of a law, thus, is measured by its ability to prevent harm or promote good through the use of deterrence.
Bentham applies the principle of utility to lawmaking by arguing that laws should be designed to maximise the overall happiness of the community. Legislators should focus on creating laws that produce the greatest net benefit (happiness) or minimize harm (pain). This approach requires considering the likely consequences of laws and ensuring they align with the general welfare.
What is the difference between act utilitarianism and rule utiliariaism?
- Rule-based decision-making involves following established rules that generally promote utility c
- Case-by-case decision-making evaluates individual actions based on their specific consequences
- Bentham supports case-by-case decision-making (act utilitarianism) but acknowledges that in some situations, following consistent rules (rule utilitarianism) might lead to better overall outcomes. The choice between these methods depends on which approach is more likely to maximise happiness or minimize pain.
Bentham acknowledges that rules can sometimes be useful (true/false)
True !
Bentham acknowledges that rules can be useful because they provide consistency and can lead to predictable outcomes that generally promote the greatest happiness
Example: red traffic lights - consistency here is crucial; rules in sports - if we were playing a game where everyone randomly decided what is fair on the spot, it would be chaos. . Rules provide a framework that everyone agrees to follow, which makes the game fair and enjoyable
Would Bentham support following rules because they are inherently right?
Nope!
For Bentham, even when following rules, the ultimate standard should always be utility—the tendency of an action or rule to produce the greatest happiness or minimize suffering. Rules should be followed not because they are inherently right but because, in most cases, they lead to better overall outcomes.
