Justice and Injustice

Justice is poorly understood by the public.

It is commonly defined by the comparison between “the one who is right” and “the one who is wrong”.

However, unfortunately the economic and legal relationships of individuals in a modern society are not so simple to define.

The interweaving of positive and negative elements of a case obliges the Judge to decide by relying on the strict letter of the law, that is to say that he must “say the law”

To rule on the law and to administer justice is to rule on the rights of everyone.

This is different from “equity” which decides a dispute by relying more on the intimate conviction of natural justice than on the letter of the law.

It is this fundamental difference between justice and equity that makes disappointed litigants say: “I was right and the judge found me wrong.”

Let us not confuse being right if morality is on our side, with having a right or regard for the law.

The Lawyer is in principle present at your side to differentiate between equity and pure law.

He will try to transform the facts and your morals into the rule of law.

But the game is not over if this analysis is “on the razor’s edge”.

The Judge will always look for the most logical between two contradictory theses (yours and that of your opponent).

Logic always comes to the aid of law,

So…justice is not necessarily the opposite of injustice.

But fairness is often “unfairness.”

Jacqueline NEGRO Lawyer at the Paris Court of Appeal