Criminal Sanctions and Civil Remedies - Essay Example

Criminal sanctions and civil remedies Question a Provide an essay plan setting out how you would address the question The ability to understand the difference between civil and criminal law can help individuals to understand the possible outcome that can result from any legal proceeding. This way, it is possible for an individual to know whether to seek legal redress through the court, or to adapt an out-of-court settlement, based on the likely outcome. Therefore, it is important to understand the existing difference between criminal law and civil law. This essay therefore seeks explain the existing difference between criminal law and the civil law, with a view to establish the process through which these different legal processes work. Further, the essay will discuss the set of rules that determine the rights, duties and responsibilities under both criminal and civil law, and also the difference in the intentions of these two types of law. The essay will also focus on the nature of gains that the two types of law would seek to secure for the claimants. The essay will be broken down into three parts: Introduction This section will cover; The definitions of sanction and remedies as applied in law The existing differences between the intentions of the criminal and the civil law The nature of the gains and safeguards targeted by each type of law Discussion This part of the essay will discuss the differences between criminal and civil law in greater details, which will include; i. Criminal law process and procedures Criminal sanctions Motives of criminal law sanctions Deterrence Rehabilitation Incapacitation ii. Civil law process and procedures Motives of civil law remedies Equitable remedies Compensation for loss Payment of damages Question 1(b): Provide an answer to the question in the style of an essay Introduction Sanctions refers to a penalty that the courts issue on a party either in a criminal or civil proceeding, as a way of punishing a party for committing an act prohibited by the law (An introduction to criminal sanctions, 2015:5). On the other hand, remedies have been defined as the relief offered to the winning litigant in a civil case (An introduction to civil remedies, 2015, 5). Remedies as applied in civil law are actually different from sanctions, owing to the fact that remedies are not usually punitive, while sanctions must have a punitive effect on the party losing the case. Therefore, while the issuance of a sanction in a civil proceeding by the courts is meant to punish the party found to have committed a wrongdoing, the issuance of a remedy is meant to redress the loss that has been suffered, or which is to be suffered by the winning party in a civil case (An introduction to civil remedies, 2015, 5). The legal principles that apply to the criminal cases are very different from the principles that apply to the civil cases. The fundamental difference existing between civil and criminal cases is the notion of punishment. While the criminal principles of the law seek to punish the offender, the civil principles of the law seek to redress the wrong that has been done by one party against another (An introduction to civil remedies, 2015, 5). In this respect, the motives of the criminal law are totally different from those of the civil law, and similarly the gains sought by the criminal law are completely different from those ones sought by civil law. The outcome of a criminal law is punitive to the offender, and thus the courts always give the determination of a criminal law in form of a sanction. However, the outcome of a civil case can be determined in form of either a sanction or a remedy. Therefore, the difference between criminal and civil law emanates in the nature of the outcome of their respective proceedings. While the outcome of the criminal proceeding is always a sanction, a civil proceeding can issue its outcome either as a sanction or a remedy, based on the nature of the civil wrong committed by the party. The major difference between sanctions and remedies derives from their intent. The criminal outcome of a proceeding seeks to punish the offender for the violations of the laws that have been prohibited, while at the same time applying the punishment as a way of deterring the offender from committing such a violation in the future. The party found culpable in a criminal proceeding is punished on the basis of being unable to give reasonable and sufficient reasons for why they did what they did, which constituted to doing what has been prohibited by the law (An introduction to criminal sanctions, 2015:5). The major gain targeted by the criminal law therefore is ensuring that the criminal offender is not only punished for acting in a way that the law has prohibited, but also being deterred from committing the offense in the future. On the other hand, civil law seeks to redress a wrong that has been done by one party against the other through issuing a sanction or remedy that reliefs the winning litigant in the case from loss or the possible damages that were incurred as a result of the civil wrongdoing of the other party. The major gains and safeguards associated with civil law is that the party affected by the wrong doing of another party is protected from incurring losses or damages, by being compensated (An introduction to civil remedies, 2015, 6). Discussion Civil and criminal law proceedings follow different procedures. While the criminal proceeding is taken up by the state and the defendant is charged on the basis of committing a wrongdoing that goes against the provisions of the law of the state, a civil proceeding is treated as a tussle between two private parties. Thus, the outcome of a criminal proceeding is always a punitive order of the court in form of a sanction. On the other hand, the outcome of a civil proceeding is a redressing order in form of a remedy. Criminal sanctions almost always come out of an individual being charged of an offence, except on exceptional cases where the sanction might arise out of contempt of court by a party (An introduction to criminal sanctions, 2015:5). The determination of the sanction that a court issues over a party found guilty of a criminal conviction depends on a range of factors. These factors may include the offense on which the defendant was convicted, the nature of the offense perpetrated by the party found guilty during the conviction, and the previous history of criminal record. The motives of criminal sanctions are also different, based on the nature of the criminal offense that was committed by the party found guilty. The first motive of a criminal sanction can be to deter an individual from being in a position to commit a similar offense in the future (An introduction to criminal sanctions, 2015:13). The second motive of issuing a punitive sanction against a defendant who has been found guilty in a criminal proceeding is to punish the individual, through for example fining the individual a certain amount of money or requiring the individual to do or to refrain from doing something. Another motive of sanctions as issued in a criminal proceeding is to ensure that the individual or party that was found guilty of committing a criminal offense is transformed and rehabilitated. Thus, for the criminal law to achieve the different motives, it has offered a variety of sanctions that can be issued against criminal offenders. Deterrence is one of the ways in which the intent of criminal law can be accomplished. Deterrence focuses on preventing a specific offender or other individuals or parties in the community from committing a similar type of offence in the future (An introduction to criminal sanctions, 2015:13). This is achieved through the criminal offenders being issued with sanctions that have harsh punitive effects, which ensures that the offender and the rest of the members of the community would refrain from committing a similar offense, due to the fear of the outcome. Therefore, when the courts are applying criminal sanctions as a way of deterring future crimes, the focus of the court is shifted from the offense that has been committed by the criminal offender, to the likelihood of the offender committing the same offense again (An introduction to criminal sanctions, 2015:13). In this respect, even where the offense committed by the defendant may not warrant a very harsh punishment or a very heavy fine, the courts can indeed apply a more harsh punishment or fine on the individual, as a way of deterring the offender as well as the others in the society from committing a similar offense in the future. The theory of general deterrence offers that individuals will not commit an offense, if the outcome is harsh enough to scare them from committing such a crime (An introduction to criminal sanctions, 2015:14). Due to this assumption, the court can apply a harsher penalty on an offender, as a way of making the rest of the community scared of such consequences. Once a party or an individual has been made an example through a very harsh punishment, the rest of the society is likely to fear committing a similar offense in the future. Rehabilitation is another motive of the criminal law that also seeks to prevent the offender or the community from committing a similar offense in the future. However, the rehabilitation motive applies a different approach from the deterrence approach. The rehabilitation principle applies the concept of a more lenient and sympathetic penalty or punishment on a criminal defendant who has been found guilty (An introduction to criminal sanctions, 2015:14). The approach applied by the rehabilitation motive of the criminal law sanction is to unearth the innate goodness of individuals, and make it to flourish rather than demoralizing the spirit of the offender and causing them to regret through a harsher punishment. The rehabilitative approach of the criminal law sanction therefore applies channels of modifying individual behaviors such as education or counseling, to enable the individuals change their behavior and thus refrain from committing a similar offense in the future (An introduction to criminal sanctions, 2015:14). Incapacitation is the other motive of the criminal law sanction that seeks to ensure that a criminal offender who is found guilty of having committed a criminal offense is put is such a position that the individual is not able to commit such an offense anymore. The incapacitation sanction can take the form of a court issuing a life imprisonment sentence to ensure that the offender who has been charged with a criminal offense is no longer able to come back to the society and commit a similar crime (An introduction to criminal sanctions, 2015:14). Such an approach is applied where the offender is found to be a serious threat to the welfare of the society, and thus is removed from the society and made incapable of hurting the society anymore. The civil law motive and intention is however very different from the criminal law intentions. The motive of the civil law sanctions is to ensure that a party that has been done a civil wrong by the other party is relieved from the effect of the wrong doing. This relief can occur through a number of remedies. First, a court can issue an equitable remedy, ether in the form of a court injunction or a specific performance order (An introduction to civil remedies, 2015, 5). The injunction order prevents the party found guilty of a civil wrong from continuing to perpetrate the wrong doing. On the other hand, a specific performance requires the party found guilty of a civil wrong doing to fulfill part of the contract that will confer benefit to the winning litigant. The other remedy that can be issued under the civil law is compensation for losses, where an individual can be compensated for a loss incurred, even though such a monetary award may not fully compensate a claimant for the loss (An introduction to civil remedies, 2015, 6). Payment of damages is the other way through which a civil law remedy can be issued in a civil law proceeding, as a way of enabling the winning litigant scoop the losses or recover from an adverse effect caused by another party (An introduction to civil remedies, 2015, 19). The damages can either be higher or lower, depending on the circumstances of the wrongdoing. For example, if the party that committed a civil wrong actually benefitted and made a profit out of that wrong doing, the winning litigant can be paid a much higher amount of damages than the party could have actually incurred in losses (An introduction to civil remedies, 2015, 20). On the other hand, if the winning litigant participated or contributed in the wrong doing in some way, the damages paid can be reduced and thus be paid lower than the actual loss incurred by that party. Conclusion In conclusion, it can be observed that civil remedies provide redress and a remedy for any loss suffered, whereas criminal sanctions have a number of social objectives. This is because, while civil remedies seek to compensate or indemnify a party for the loss incurred out of a civil wrong doing by another party, the criminal sanctioning may aim at rehabilitating, deterring or incapacitating a criminal offender, for the sake of avoiding a future repeat of the same crime. Further, while the civil remedies seeks to redress the loss suffered by a single party to a given case of civil wrongdoing, the criminal sanctioning seeks to deter both the offender and the rest of the community from committing a similar crime in the future. References An introduction to criminal sanctions. (23 January 2015). “Unit 18”: An introduction to criminal sanctions”. The Open University, 1-31. An introduction to civil remedies. (26 January 2015). “Unit 17”: An introduction to civil remedies”. The Open University, 1-31. Read More