Law of Tort

‘Judges should focus on principles of law only in their decision making. Issues of policy should be resolved by the legislature.’ Critically discuss the above statement with 2500 words, create different arguments substantiating and illustrating a response by drawing from any one area of tort law, relevant case law, statute and legal commentary. With references and a bibliography. Please use OSCOLA referencing Key Rules for OSCOLA Referencing: Footnotes: Place a superscript number after the relevant text (and punctuation) at the end of a sentence. Cases: Party Names [Year] Court Number, [Report Citation]. Example: Corr v IBC Vehicles Ltd [2008] UKHL 13, [2008] 1 AC 884. Legislation: Short Title, Year. Example: Human Rights Act 1998, s 10. Books: Author, Title (Edition, Publisher Year). Example: A Author, Title of Book (Publisher 2023). Journal Articles: Author, ‘Title’ [Year] Volume/Issue Journal Name Page Number. Bibliography: Divided into Table of Cases, Table of Legislation, and Bibliography (Secondary Sources). I will attach a file with how I would like my essay to be structured please. please include: * Law Reviews/Journals: Look for articles in journals like the “Harvard Law Review,” “Yale Law Journal,” or the “Oxford Journal of Legal Studies.” Search for keywords like “judicial policy-making,” “legal principles vs. policy,” or “separation of powers in jurisprudence.” * Tort Law: A good starting point is Donoghue v Stevenson [1932] AC 562. It’s a foundational case in negligence, and the judgments discuss the principles behind establishing a duty of care, which has clear policy implications. * Case Law: Consider cases like *Caparo Industries plc v Dickman* [1990] 2 AC 605, which deals with the duty of care in negligence and explicitly considers policy implications. Also, look at *R (on the application of Begum) v Denbigh High School* [2006] UKHL 15, which involves human rights and religious freedom, where the House of Lords had to balance legal principles with broader societal policies. * Statute: The Human Rights Act 1998 is a key piece of legislation that requires courts to interpret laws in line with the European Convention on Human Rights, often bringing policy considerations to the forefront. * Legal Commentary: Read works by legal philosophers like Ronald Dworkin (“Law’s Empire”) and H.L.A. Hart (“The Concept of Law”). Dworkin argues for principles as integral to law, while Hart focuses on law as a system of rules, which can help you understand the theoretical underpinnings of the debate. Also, look into commentary on judicial activism versus restraint. p