Skip to main content

law and morality

 LAW AND MORALITY

S KARTHICK PRAKASH

20BLB1033

To understand the relationship between Law and Morality, it's first necessary to understand

what the terms Law and Morality mean. Law isn't a commodity that can be read and taken

literally. The academy of natural law interpreted the law in relation to morality by using the

term morality. It concentrated on what should be the rule rather than what's presently the law.

They argued that law should be interpreted in terms of faith, morality, liberty, justice, and

heart, rather than simply in terms of the law.

Still, positivism characterized the law as stressing that it's only subject to our own gests.

There's no connection between morality and the law. The law is the coming of the Sovereign

that can be executed through discipline.

Morality is a collection of principles that allow people to live together in communities. It's

what societies suppose right and applicable Morality is not set in the gravestone. What you

consider applicable in your culture won't be respectable in another. Morals are told by

geographical areas, faith, family, and life gests.

Difference between Law and Morality

There was no difference between law and morality in Ancient Societies. They were both

studying to be the same person. With the appearance of the Middle Periods, the faith handed

a spiritual foundation for the law. Ultramodern proponents in the post-Reformation period

stressed the discrepancy between law and morality.

The following are some of the differences between law and morality

Law is concerned with a person's individual liberty, while morality is concerned with

collaborative generalizations of what's good and evil.

Law governs a man's geste when he's a member of a particular society, whereas morals

govern a man's gesture indeed when he's alone.

Laws consider a man's outside geste, while morals consider factors similar as inner

resoluteness and restraint direction.

Law is assessed by" external compulsion," while values appeal to an existent's free will.

Case laws on Law and Morality

Queen vs. Dudley and Stephen's Case

For numerous days, the defendants, Dudley and Stephens, as well as two other gentlemen,

Mr. Brooks and the survivor, Richard Parker, sat on the boat. When it came clear that

everyone would corrupt from thirst and hunger, the defendants agreed to kill Parker for the

sake of the others. A man who kills another to eat his meat in order to escape hunger death is

shamefaced of murder; still, he's in similar circumstances at the time of the act that he

believes and has fair reasons to believe that it's the only way to save his life.

Judgment of the case In this case, the court held that one person can not immolate another

person's life to save his or her own. And on these data, there was no substantiation of any

necessity that could justify the captures in killing the boy and they were shamefaced of

murder. It becomes veritably important clear by the decision in this case that what appeared

to be innocently right from the eyes of the defendants was considered as a crime in the eyes

of the law.

Oppenheimer v Cattermole

He lost his German citizenship and was liable to pay levies under German law 1913, "When

there were no problems of the countries being at war," which claimed that a German lost their

German nation if they attained a foreign nation without authorization.

Relationship between Law and Morality

While the law is a subject of study in Political Science and morality is a subject of study in

Ethics, the two have a close relationship. Law and morality are mutually buttressing. People

are tutored by the law of conduct by ethics. It demonstrates the difference between fact and

deception. It makes us apprehensive of our acts' impropriety and rightness. Ethics allows us

to suppose innocently and improves our moral standing. It aids in the creation of our moral

norms. The same thing is pursued by state-legislated legislation.

The overarching thing of the state is to promote people's well-being. Individualities can also

profit from political wisdom in order to come better people. An existent can only come to an

ideal citizen if he adheres to the moral law of conduct. As a result, there's a strong connection

between law and morality. And when a state function under ideal moral rules can it be called

an ideal state. The foundation of ideal laws is morality. It would prop the exigency of an ideal

state if the state works under ideal laws grounded on morality
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Section 58B of The Advocates Act - Special provision relating to certain disciplinary proceedings

 Section 58B The Advocates Act Description (1) As from the 1st day of September, 1963, every proceeding in respect of any disciplinary matter in relation to an existing advocate of a High Court shall, save as provided in the first proviso to sub-section (2), be disposed of by the State Bar Council in relation to that High Court, as if the existing advocate had been enrolled as an advocate on its roll. (2) If immediately before the said date, there is any proceeding in respect of any disciplinary matter in relation to an existing advocate pending before any High Court under the Indian Bar Councils Act, 1926 (38 of 1926), such proceeding shall stand transferred to the State Bar Council in relation to that High Court, as if it were a proceeding pending before the corresponding Bar Council under clause (c) of sub-section (1) of section 56: Provided that where in respect of any such proceeding the High Court has received the finding of a Tribunal constituted under section 11 of the Indian B
Post a Comment
Read more

Case Laws related to Defamation in favour of ClaimantCase Laws related to Defamation in favour of Claimant. TOLLEY Vs, J.S FRY & SONS LTD – (1931) Facts The defendants were owners of chocolate manufacturing company. They advertised their products with a caricature of the claimant, who was a prominent amateur golfer, showing him with the defendants’ chocolate in his pocket while playing golf. The advertisement compared the excellence of the chocolate to the excellence of the claimant’s drive. The claimant did not consent to or knew about the advertisement. Issue The claimant alleged that the advertisement suggested that he agreed to his portrait being used for commercial purposes and for financial gain. He further claimed that the use of his image made him look like someone who prostituted his reputation for advertising purposes and was thus unworthy of his status. At trial, several golfers gave evidence to the effect that if an amateur sold himself for advertisement, he no longer maintained his amateur status and might be asked to resign from his respective club. Furthermore, there was evidence that the possible adverse effects of the caricature on the claimant’s reputation were brought to the defendants’ attention. The trial judge found that the caricature could have a defamatory meaning. The jury then found in favor of the claimant. Held The House of Lords held that in the circumstances of this case – as explained by the facts – the caricature was capable of constituting defamation. In other words, the publication could have the meaning alleged by the claimant. The Lords also ordered a new trial limited to the assessment of damages. NEWSTEAD V LANDON EXPRESS NEWSPAPER LTD, (1939) Facts: A newspaper published a defamatory article about Harold Newstead. However, another person with this name brought an action in libel. He claimed that the article had been misunderstood as leading to him. The defendant newspaper recognised that they published the article. Also, they denied that they had the intention of being defamatory of him. Consequently, the claimant argued that the newspaper was under a duty. The duty was to give a clear and complete description of the correct person. Moreover, the claimant argued that the defendants were in breach of the duty. Issues: The issue in Newstead v London Express Newspaper, was if the reasonable persons would have understood the words complained of to refer to the plaintiff. Held: The Court of Appeal stated that in accordance with the current law on libel, liability for libel does not depend on the intention of the defamer; but on the fact of the defamation. Accordingly, a reasonable man, in this case a newspaper publisher, must be aware of the possibility of individuals with the same name and must assume that the words published will be read by a reasonable man with reasonable care.

  Case Laws related to Defamation in favour of Claimant.  TOLLEY  Vs,  J.S FRY & SONS LTD – (1931) Facts The defendants were owners of chocolate manufacturing company. They advertised their products with a caricature of the claimant, who was a prominent amateur golfer, showing him with the defendants’ chocolate in his pocket while playing golf. The advertisement compared the excellence of the chocolate to the excellence of the claimant’s drive. The claimant did not consent to or knew about the advertisement.   Issue The claimant alleged that the advertisement suggested that he agreed to his portrait being used for commercial purposes and for financial gain. He further claimed that the use of his image made him look like someone who prostituted his reputation for advertising purposes and was thus unworthy of his status. At trial, several golfers gave evidence to the effect that if an amateur sold himself for advertisement, he no longer maintained his amateur status and might be aske
1 comment
Read more

Rules as to delivery of goods

                             Rules as to delivery of goods Section 2(2) of Sale of Goods Act defines ‘delivery’ as a ‘voluntary transfer of possession from one person to another.’ Thus, if the transfer of goods is not voluntary and is taken by theft, by fraud, or by force, then there is no ‘delivery. Moreover, the ‘delivery’ should have the effect of putting the goods in possession of the buyer. The essence of the delivery is a voluntary transfer of possession of goods from one person to another. There is no delivery of goods where they are obtained at pistol point or theft. 1. Mode of Delivery: According to Section 33, delivery of goods sold may be made by doing anything which the parties agree shall be treated as delivery or which has the effect of putting the goods in the possession of the buyer or of any person authorized to hold them on his behalf. Delivery of goods may be actual, symbolic or constructive. 2. Expenses of Delivery: According to Section 36(5), unless otherwise agree
Post a Comment
Read more