Concept of Wrongs, Duties and Rights | Jurisprudence - CLAT PG PDF Download

Wrongs

A wrong is simply a wrong act—an act contrary to the rule of right and justice. A synonym of it is injury, in its true and primary sense of injuria(that which is contrary to jus). Wrongs or injuries are divisible for our present purpose into two kinds, being either moral or legal.

Moral Wrong

• A moral or natural wrong is an act which is morally or naturally wrong, being contrary to the rule of natural justice.

Legal Wrong

• A legal wrong is an act which is legally wrong, being contrary to the rule of legal justice and a violation of the law.
• It is an act which is authoritatively determined to be wrong by a rule of law and is therefore treated as a wrong in and for the purposes of the administration of justice by the state.
• It may or may not be a wrong indeed and in truth, and conversely a moral wrong may or may not be a wrong in law.

In all ordinary cases the legal recognition of an act as a wrong involves the suppression or punishment of it by the physical force of the state, this being the essential purpose for which the judicial action of the state is ordained.

Duties

• A duty is an obligatory act it is an act the opposite of which would be a wrong. Duties and wrongs are correlatives. The commission of a wrong is the breach of a duty, and the performance of a duty is the avoidance of a wrong, A synonym of duty is obligation, in its widest sense. Duties, like wrongs, are of two kinds, being either moral or legal. 
• A moral or natural duty is an act the opposite of which would be a moral or natural wrong. A legal duty is an act the opposite of which would be a legal wrong. 
• It is an act recognised as a duty by the law and treated as such in and for the purposes of the administration of justice by the state.

Rights

• A right is an interest recognised and protected by a rule of right. It is any interest, respect for which is a duty, and the disregard of which is a wrong.
• All that is right or wrong, just or unjust, is so by reason of its effects upon the interests of mankind, that is to say upon the various elements of human well-being, such as life, liberty, health, reputation, and the uses of material objects.
• If any act is right or just, it is so because and in so far as it promotes some form of human interest.
• If any act is wrong or unjust, it is because the interests of men are prejudicially affected by it.

Conduct which has no influence upon the interests of anyone has no significance either in law or morals. Every wrong, therefore, involves some interest attacked by it, and every duty involves some interest to which it relates, and for whose protection it exists. The converse, however, is not true. 

Every attack upon an interest is not a wrong, either in fact or in law, nor is respect for every interest a duty, either legal or natural. Many interests exist de facto and not also de jure; they receive no recognition or protection from any rule of right. The violation of them is no wrong, and respect for them is no duty. 

For the interests of men conflict with each other, and it is impossible for all to receive rightful recognition. The rule of justice selects some for protection, and the others are rejected. The interests which thus receive recognition and protection from the rules of right are called rights. Every man who has a right to any thing has an interest in it also, but he may have an interest without having a right. 

Whether his interest amounts to a right depends on whether there exists with respect to it a duty imposed upon any other person. In other words, a right is an interest the violation of which is a wrong.

Correlation between Rights and Duties

• Rights and duties are necessarily correlative. There can be no right without a corresponding duty, or duty without a corresponding right.
• For every duty must be a duty towards some person or persons, in whom, therefore, a correlative right is vested. And conversely every right must be a right against some person or persons, upon whom, therefore, a correlative duty is imposed.
• Every right or duty involves a vinculum juris or bond of legal obligation, by which two or more persons are bound together.
• There can be no duty unless there is someone to whom it is due ; there can be no right unless there is someone from whom it is claimed; and there can be no wrong unless there is someone who is wronged, that is to say, whose right has been violated.

Theories of Rights

Interest Theory

• Example: You have a right to vote if someone is legally required to provide you with the opportunity to vote and to count your ballot.

Rudolf Von Ihering further developed this idea by stating that a legal right is a legally protected interest. He emphasized the importance of protecting people's interests rather than their will, aiming to avoid conflicts between individual interests.

Will Theory

• Freedom is considered the most basic right and a moral (or natural) right.
• All other rights, whether moral or legal, are specific protected freedoms.
• Limiting someone's freedom requires authorization from others' rights.
• Subjects of rights have the option to "claim" their rights or not.

According to the Will Theory:

• Rights are inherent attributes of the human will.
• The law's purpose is to allow the expression of free will.
• The subject matter of rights is derived from the human will.

John Locke stated that "the basis of the right is the will of the individual." According to Puchta, legal rights empower individuals over objects, allowing them to subject the object to their will.
For example, if A buys a piece of land from B:

• A is the subject or owner of the right.
• The persons bound by the correlative duty are persons in general.
• The content of the right consists in non-interference with A's exclusive use of the land.
• The object or subject matter of the right is the land.
• The title of the right is the conveyance by which it was acquired from the former owner.

Elements of Legal Rights

Legal rights consist of the following five elements:

• Ownership: A person in whom the right is vested, distinguished as the owner, subject, or entitled person.
• Correlative Duty: A person against whom the right avails, upon whom the duty lies, distinguished as the bound person or subject of the duty.
• Obligatory Act: An act or omission obligatory on the bound person in favor of the entitled person, termed the content of the right.
• Object: Something to which the act or omission relates, termed the object or subject matter of the right.
• Title: Certain facts or events by reason of which the right has become vested in its owner.

For instance, if A buys a piece of land from B:

• A is the owner of the right.
• The duty-bound persons are general public.
• The content of the right is non-interference with A's exclusive use of the land.
• The object of the right is the land itself.
• The title of the right is the conveyance from the former owner.

Types of Legal Rights

Perfect and Imperfect Rights:

• Perfect rights correspond with perfect duties and are recognized and enforced by law. For example, if A lends money to B, A has a perfect right to recover the loan, and B has a perfect duty to repay it.
• Imperfect rights correspond with imperfect duties, which are recognized by law but cannot be enforced. For instance, if a loan is time-barred, A's right to claim the loan becomes imperfect.

Positive and Negative Rights:

• Positive rights have corresponding positive duties and require a positive act to be fulfilled. Negative rights correspond to negative duties and require an act of omission.

Rights in Rem and Rights in Personam:

• Rights in rem (jus in rem) are rights against or in respect of a person, available against the whole world. Examples include possession and ownership.
• Rights in personam correspond to duties imposed on specific individuals, such as contractual rights.

Proprietary and Personal Rights:

• Proprietary rights pertain to property ownership and have economic or monetary value, such as land, debts, and patents.
• Personal rights relate to an individual's well-being or status, like the right to safety or reputation, and do not have economic value.

Rights in Re Propria and Rights in Re Aliena:

• Rights in re propria are rights over one's own property, such as land ownership.
• Rights in re aliena are rights over another person's property, known as encumbrances.

Principal and Accessory Rights:

• Principal rights are vital and main rights vested under law, while accessory rights are incidental or consequential rights.

Primary and Sanctioning Rights:

• Primary rights are basic and independent rights, like the right to reputation.
• Sanctioning rights are consequential rights that arise for the redressal of a wrong.

Vested and Contingent Rights:

• Vested rights exist when an interest in property is transferred in favor of a person without specifying time or conditions.
• Contingent rights depend on the occurrence of a specified uncertain event for the interest to become effective.

Legal and Equitable Rights:

• Legal rights are granted by common law courts based on statute, custom, or usage.
• Equitable rights are outcomes of the law of equity, based on principles of natural justice and conscience.

Hoffield Analysis of Rights

• Hoffield, a law professor, simplified the concept of rights by classifying them into eight distinct concepts, grouped into jural correlatives and jural opposites.
• Jural correlatives are pairs where the existence of one implies the existence of another, while jural opposites are pairs where the existence of one implies the absence of the other.

Right (Claim)-No Right (no Claim)

• My legal rights (in the strict sense) are the benefits derived from legal duties imposed on others. These rights, recognized and protected by law, involve interests that others ought to fulfill for me.
• For example, if I have a legal right to a loan repayment, it means that B is legally obligated to repay the loan to me. I have a claim against B to fulfill this legal duty.

Liberties/Privilege-Duty

• Legal liberties are benefits derived from the absence of legal duties imposed on myself. They represent interests in doing as I please within the confines of the law.
• The jural opposite of liberty is duty, which means that others are obligated not to infringe upon or interfere with my sphere of liberty.

Power-Disability

• A power is the ability conferred by law on a person to determine rights, duties, liabilities, or legal relations of themselves or others. Powers can be public or private.
• The jural opposite of power is disability, meaning that granting power to one person disables another from exercising that power and alters the legal relationship between the two.

Immunity-Liability

• Immunity protects individuals from liabilities that may be imposed on them. For instance, Sikhs wearing turbans are exempt from wearing helmets while driving, which shields them from liability under the law.