Why do we impose tort liability when we do? I try this question on my students’ uncorrupted minds in the first class of my tort law course by posing several simple hypotheticals. Their answers often have to do with responsibility, often along the lines of ‘you have to pay, because you are responsible for another’s harm’. This intuitive idea has also attracted many tort theorists. Emmanuel Voyiakis’s answer is ostensibly also grounded in responsibility, but it is very different, and in the current state of the academic debates over the justification of tort liability, rather unfamiliar. To get a sense of just how much, it is hard to beat the summary of the view that appears in the very last sentence of his book:

中文翻译：

---

侵权责任中的责任归属

我们为什么要强加侵权责任？在我的侵权法课程的第一节课上，我通过提出几个简单的假设，在学生未受污染的头脑中尝试这个问题。他们的回答通常与责任有关，通常是“你必须付出代价，因为你要为他人的伤害负责”。这种直观的想法也吸引了许多侵权理论家。Emmanuel Voyiakis 的回答表面上也是基于责任，但它是非常不同的，并且在目前学术界关于侵权责任的正当性争论的状态下，相当陌生。为了了解到底有多少，很难超越他书中最后一句话中出现的观点的总结：