Abstract: In a long essay published in 1998, I have defended a version of the Interest Theory of legal rights.1 That theory, which stands in opposition to the Will Theory, can be tersely and approximately summarized in the following two theses: For the Interest Theory, then, the essence of a right consists in the normative protection of some aspect(s) of the right-holder's well-being. The two principal tenets of the Interest Theory are squarely rejected by the proponents of the Will Theory. Most of the Will Theorists maintain that a right's potential to protect an interest of X is not necessary (as well as not sufficient) for X's holding of the right, and they also maintain that X's competence and authorization to demand/ waive the enforcement of a right are separately necessary and jointly sufficient for X's holding of that right. For the Will Theory, the essence of a right consists in opportunities for the right-holder to make normatively significant choices relating to the behaviour of someone else.
Publication Year: 2001
Publication Date: 2001-01-01
Language: en
Type: book-chapter
Indexed In: ['crossref']
Access and Citation
Cited By Count: 78
AI Researcher Chatbot
Get quick answers to your questions about the article from our AI researcher chatbot