Wildy logo
(020) 7242 5778
enquiries@wildy.com

Wildy’s Book News

Book News cover photo

Vol 22 No 3 March/April 2017

Book of the Month

Cover of Company Directors: Duties, Liabilities and Remedies

Company Directors: Duties, Liabilities and Remedies

Edited by: Simon Mortimore
Price: £225.00

Pupillage & Student Offers

Special Discounts for Pupils, Newly Called & Students

Read More ...


Secondhand & Out of Print

Browse Secondhand Online

Read More...


UK Public Holiday May 2017

Wildy's will be closed on Monday 1st May and will re-open on Tuesday 2nd May.

Online book orders received during the time we are closed will be processed as soon as possible once we re-open on Tuesday.

As usual Credit Cards will not be charged until the order is processed and ready to despatch.

Any non-UK eBook orders placed after 5pm on the Friday 28th April will not be processed until Tuesday 2nd May. UK eBook orders will be processed as normal.

Hide this message

Law and Disagreement

Image not available lge

ISBN13: 9780199243037
ISBN: 0199243034
Published: August 2001
Publisher: Oxford University Press
Country of Publication: UK
Format: Paperback (Hardback in 1999)
Price: £29.49
Hardback edition , ISBN13 9780198262138



Low stock.

When people disagree about justice and individual rights, how should political decisions be made among them? How should they decide about issues like tax policy, welfare provision, criminal procedure, discrimination law, hate speech, pornography, political dissent and the limits of religious toleration? The most familiar answer is that these decisions should be made democratically, by majority voting among the people or their representatives.

Often, however, this answer is qualified by adding ""providing that the majority decision does not violate individual rights"". In this book, Jeremy Waldron has revisited and thoroughly revised 13 of his most recent essays. He argues that the familiar answer is correct, but that the qualification about individual rights is incoherent. If rights are the very things we disagree about, then we are quarrelling precisely about what that qualification should amount to. At best, what it means is that disagreements about rights should be resolved by some other procedure, for example, by majority voting, not among the people or their representatives, but among judges in a court.

Image not available lge
Subjects:
Jurisprudence