CONSTANT RETURN OF OBJECTIVISM IN RESPONSIBILITY. CRITICISM FROM CONTRIBUTIONS OF SCHOLASTIC MORALISTS AND JURISTS TO AN ASSUMED CONCEPTION OF VERSARI IN RE ILLICITA

dc.coverageDOI: 10.17398/2340-4256.19.817
dc.creatorPinto, Tatiana Vargas
dc.date2024
dc.date.accessioned05-01-2026 18:21
dc.date.available05-01-2026 18:21
dc.description<p>The easy attribution of effects from illicit conduct is well reflected in the usual objective understanding of versari in re illicita. The study shows how a series of inaccuracies from that meaning leads to maintaining an objective imputation that affirms responsibility (and liability) for results. Although similar objective canonical references are found, the assignment of chance is not true in the scholastic use. The context of development of the versari, the confusion about the idea of casus, as well as explanations from Thomistic sources, make it possible to contradict the traditional objective interpretation of the maxim. Instead, in the Thomistic scholasticism there is a necessary relationship between objective and subjective aspects from the versari as an imputation rule.</p>eng
dc.identifierhttps://investigadores.uandes.cl/en/publications/bb8d0a27-e093-4908-ab34-11f216b67a67
dc.languagespa
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
dc.sourcevol.19 (2024) p.817-847
dc.subjectimputation
dc.subjectindirect intention
dc.subjectstrict liability
dc.subjectversari in re illicita
dc.subjectvoluntas per accidens
dc.titleCONSTANT RETURN OF OBJECTIVISM IN RESPONSIBILITY. CRITICISM FROM CONTRIBUTIONS OF SCHOLASTIC MORALISTS AND JURISTS TO AN ASSUMED CONCEPTION OF VERSARI IN RE ILLICITAeng
dc.titleCONSTANTE RETORNO DEL OBJETIVISMO EN LA RESPONSABILIDAD. CRÍTICA DESDE APORTES DE MORALISTAS Y JURISTAS ESCOLÁSTICOS ANTE UNA CONCEPCIÓN ASUMIDA DE VERSARI IN RE ILLICITAspa
dc.typeArticleeng
dc.typeArtículospa
Files