A tort is a civil wrong that can be remedied by awarding damages

The Study of Law. Tort Law. Case Note. Law Clinics.

A tort is a civil wrong that can be remedied by awarding damages (other remedies may also be available). These civil wrongs result in harm to a person or property that forms the basis of a claim by the injured party. The harm can be physical, emotional or financial. Examples of torts include medical negligence, negligent damage to private property and negligent misstatements causing financial loss.

There are many specific torts, such as trespass, assault and negligence. Business torts include fraudulent misrepresentation, interference in contractual relations and unfair business practices.

Torts fall into three general categories: intentional torts, (e.g. unfair competition), negligent torts (e.g. causing an accident by failing to obey traffic rules) and strict liability torts (e.g. liability for making and selling defective products).

Why some wrongs are dealt with by tort law (or the law of torts) and others considered criminal offences is the subject of some debate. However, there are certainly overlaps between tort law and criminal law. For example, a defendant can be liable to compensate for assault and battery in tort and also be punished for the criminal law offence of assault.

Differences between tort and criminal law include: the parties involved (the state brings an action in crime, a private individual brings an action in tort); the standard of proof (higher in criminal law); and the outcomes (a criminal action may result in a conviction and punishment, whereas an action in tort mat result in liability on the part of the defendant and damages awarded to the claimant).

The primary aims of tort law are to provide relief for the harm suffered and deter other potential tortfeasors from committing the same harms. The injured person may sue for both an injunction to stop the tortuous conduct and for monetary damages.

Depending on the jurisdiction, the damages awarded will be either compensatory or punitive. Compensatory damages are intended, as far as it is possible, to put the victim in the position he or she would have been in if the tort hadn’t occurred. Punitive damages are awarded to punish a wrongdoer. As well as compensation for damage to property, damages may also be awarded for: loss of earnings capacity, future expected losses, pain and suffering and reasonable medical expenses.

Case: Palsgalf v. The Long Island Railroad Company, 248 N.Y.339; 162 n.e. 99; Court of Appeals of New York [1928]

Facts: Plaintiff was standing on a platform of the defendant`s railroad when a train moved off from the platform. Even though it was already moving, a passenger ran to catch the train. The man, who was carrying a package wrapped in paper, appeared to lose his balance while trying to board the moving train. An employee of the railroad reached out to help him. This act caused the package in the man`s arm to fall onto the rails. Unknown to the employee, the package contained fireworks. When it fell, the fireworks exploded, causing some large equipment on the platform to strike and injure the plaintiff. The plaintiff sued the railroad, claiming that her injury resulted from the negligence of the employee.

Procedural history: The trial court found for the plaintiff. Defendants appealed, and the appellate court affirmed the judgment. The railroad then appealed to this court.

Legal issue: Did the railroad`s negligence proximately cause plaintiff`s injures?

Ruling: No. The Court of Appeals of New York reserved the decision.

Reasoning: Negligence is not a tort unless it results in the commission of a wrong. If the harm was not deliberate, it must be shown that the act could have been dangerous. Since in this case the harm to the plaintiff was not wilful on the part of defendant, it had to be shown that the act of dropping a package had the apparent possibility of danger. As there was nothing on the outside of the package which would cause the reasonable person to believe it contained explosives, there was no negligence. It was the explosion that was the proximate cause of plaintiff`s injures, an act which could not have been foreseen. Therefore the railroad was neither negligent nor the proximate cause of plaintiff`s injures. The judgment of the appellate court was reserved.

Case: Liebeck v.McDonald`s Restaurants, P.T.S.,Inc.No.D-202 CV-93-02419, 1995 WL 360309 (Bernalillo County, N.M. Dist. Ct. Aug. 18,1994)

Facts: In 1992, Stella Liebeck, a 79-year-old woman from Albuquerque, New Mexico, bought a cup of coffee from the drive-through of a McDonald`s restaurant. Liebeck placed the coffee cup between her legs and opened it. She spilled the entire cup of coffee on her lap. Liebeck was wearing cotton sweatpants which held the hot liquid against her skin, burning her lowing body severely. At the hospital, it was determined that she had suffered third-degree burns on six per cent of her skin. She stayed in the hospital for eight days. Two years of treatment followed.

Kent Law School was the first in Britain to open a law clinic and to develop a ‘a clinical legal studies’ programme as part of its undergraduate curriculum. A new Kent Law Clinic was established in 1992, and it offers a unique opportunity for law students to practise law while still undergraduates. Students regularly represent clients in a wide range of tribunals and have, in recent years, successfully assisted litigants-in-person in the Court of Appeal. This clinic offers free legal advice to its clients, with all the legal work being done by law students under the supervision of qualified lawyers. You deal with real clients rather that with fictional seminar problems, which means you can develop and refine your legal skills and learn other practical skills, such as interviewing, negotiating and advocacy. Equally importantly, you have the opportunity to experience the actual (rather than the theoretical) way the law and the…

Дата добавления: 2015-02-16 ; просмотров: 84 | Нарушение авторских прав

Прочитайте и переведите текст со словарем.

WHAT IS A TORT?

Generally speaking, a «tort» is an injury one person or entity inflicts (accidentally or intentionally) upon another. When one person commits a tort upon another, the injured

person is entitled to remedies under the law. Generally, these remedies can include monetary compensation and restraining orders. The person who brings the lawsuit is called the «plaintiff,» and the person who is sued is called the «defendant.» The area of tort law is often referred to as «personal injury» law. Most torts involve, in some part, the doctrine of «negligence.» The concept of negligence can generally be describes as (i) the failure of one person to act in way we would expect that person to do under the circumstances and (ii) an injury which results from that failure.

A tort is a civil wrong that can be remedied by awarding damages (other remedies may also be available). These civil wrongs result in harm to a person or property that forms the basis of a claim by the injured party. The harm can be physical, emotional or financial. Examples of torts include medical negligence, negligent damage to private property and negligent misstatements causing financial loss. There are many specific torts, such as trespass, assault and negligence.

Business torts include fraudulent misrepresentation, interference in contractual relations and unfair business practices. Torts fall into three general categories: intentional torts (e.g. unfair

competition), negligent torts (e.g. causing an accident by failing to obey traffic rules) and strict liability torts (e.g. liability for making and selling defective products).Why some wrongs are dealt with by tort law (or the law of torts) and others considered criminal offences is the subject of some debate. However, there are certainly overlaps between tort law and criminal law. For example, a defendant can be liable to compensate for assault and battery in tort and also be punished for the criminal law offence of assault.

Differences between tort law and criminal law include: the parties involved (the state brings an action in crime, a private individual brings an action in tort); the standard of proof (higher in criminal law); and the outcomes (a criminal action may result in a conviction and punishment, whereas an action in tort may result in liability on the part of the defendant and damages awarded to the claimant 1 ).

The primary aims of tort law are to provide relief for the harm suffered and deter other potential tortfeasors from committing the same harms. The injured person may sue for both an injunction to stop the tortious conduct and for monetary damages. Depending on the jurisdiction, the damages awarded will be either compensatory or punitive. Compensatory damages are intended to put the victim in the position he or she would have been in had the tort not occurred. Punitive damages are awarded to punish a wrongdoer. As well as compensation for damage to property, damages may also be awarded for: loss of earnings capacity, future expected losses, pain and suffering and reasonable medical expenses.

Не нашли, что искали? Воспользуйтесь поиском:

Tort as a Civil Wrong

This article is written by Ashpreet Kaur, IInd year student, B.B.A. LL.B, Symbiosis Law School, NOIDA. In this article, the author discusses about the nature and elements of the law of torts in detail along with some important case analysis.

Introduction

A tort is a civil wrong which arises when a person breaches the duty he owed to another person. A legal right is a right which is given to an individual whereas legal duty is when the same individual violates another person’s legal rights, thereby causing damage which asks for compensation (Remedy) which is unliquidated.

On reviewing the definition of torts one can see it is a combination of three differently essentials which can be classified as-

A tort is a civil wrong for which the legal remedy is an action brought by means of civil proceedings by or on behalf of the injured party for damages or some other legal remedy desired by the person who has suffered the wrong

A tort is a civil wrong

The first and the most important feature of tort is that it is a civil action and not a criminal act. It is considered as a wrong against a particular person, not the society as a whole. It infringes the right of a person or a group of person but in a criminal action, the crime is committed against the society as a whole. Unlike criminal cases, in civil wrong, it depends on the choice of a claimant that he wants proceedings or not there is no compulsion. Civil wrong does not carry the same amount of seriousness as that of a criminal act. The legal remedy is an action brought by means of a civil proceeding.

Once it is identified that action done is a civil wrong, the next step is to bring an action under civil proceedings for the sake of legal remedies. One who proceeds with a civil suit is a claimant demanding for enforcement of his rights. In these proceedings, the sole purpose is to safeguard the rights of claimant, unlike criminal proceedings where the sole purpose is to punish the culprit. Civil proceedings are mainly held to figure out the severity of wrong and what can be done in order to bring the claimant in the same situation as he/she was before the wrong was committed. In these cases, no punishment like jail or rehabilitation centre is given only damages or other remedies are given for compensating.

Constituents of torts

The term law of torts can be defined as an instrument to respect the interests and rights of others and adhere to a standard of reasonable behaviour. A protected interest procreates a legal right, which in turn procreates a corresponding legal duty. An act which violates legal right is termed as wrongful act on the behalf of which compensation for the losses can be recovered from the person who has violated the right. On the contrary, not every wrongful act is considered as torts. In order to constitute a tort there should be-

1. A wrongful act or omission

The first and foremost thing required for constituting a tort is wrongful act or omission of the act either done negligently or intentionally that was needed to be done. The act accompanied by should, under the situation, be legally wrong and must prejudicially affect the other party. The duty must be fixed by laws. These legal rights are divided into two parts-

1. Private rights

These rights belong to a person individually rather than the world at large which includes rights related to body, mind, estate here means property. Rights such as a right of property, right of reputation, right of bodily safety etc are considered as private rights.

2. Public rights

These rights are common to all the citizens of a state but are vested and vindicated by political entities. Citizens cannot enforce these rights but can exercise them. Using rivers, roads, natural resources, parks etc comes under public property and using them is considered as a public right. Its remedy lies in the indictment.

2. Damages arising out of wrongful act or omission

1. Injuria sine damno

2. Damno sine injuria

3. Remedy

The wrongful act or omission committed must come under the ambit of wrongs for which the remedy is civil action for damages. Basically, it is the right to damages that brings such acts under the ambit of the law of torts. Damages claimed under the torts are unliquidated ones. We will study remedy in details in the further.

Tortious liability

In tortious liability, there must be a duty of care towards the persons generally as fixed by laws and breach of that duty results in actionable unliquidated damages. Nowadays more people suffer from damages arising from a careless act or intentional wrongdoings. The tortious liability is further a three-step process –

1. There must be a reasonable duty of care.

2. There should be a breach of duty of care.

3. Redressal by an act of unliquidated damages.

1. Reasonable duty of care

The duty of care renders moral as well as legal obligation to ensure the safety of people in our surroundings or our immediate neighbours by adherence to standard reasonable care and avoiding any harm that is foreseeable. Elements in the duty of care are as follows-

Caprio Test

A. Reasonable foreseeable- It is to test that, if a reasonable person is swapped with the defendant could reasonably foresee the situation. This issue ensures possibilities instead of probabilities.

C. Just, fair and reasonable link- it is to check whether it is fair and just to apply the duty of care on the wrongdoer. These conditions can also be applied on the ground of imposition of a duty of care.

2. Breach of duty of care

When a person fails to match with the standard of duty laid down by laws and he is negligently performing his acts is liable for a personal injury case in the law of torts in order to determine a breach of duty one has to examine on the following basis-

A. The foreseeability of harm to the claimant should not be taken.

B. An adequate standard of care owed by the defendant to the claimant.

C. Comparison of conduct of the defendant with the expected standard of care.

3. Redressal by an act of unliquidated damages

The injured party in the case of the law of torts is treated under unliquidated damages. It is the amount that one cannot assume as it is not fixed it varies according to the situation. These are of two types general and special damages.

Ubi Jus Ibi Remedium

1. Judicial remedies- These types of remedies are brought by the claimant in the court of law usually in civil law jurisdiction. The person against whom the tort is committed can take recourse to law and seek his redressal.

Difference between judicial and extra-judicial remedies

Judicial Remedy

Extra-Judicial Remedy

They require the process of law.

They do not require the process of law.

No use of force at all.

Use of reasonable force.

Some delay is caused due to procedures of the court.

Immediate relief is available.

Compensation and other relief is available in most cases.

Compensation will not be available in most remedies.

Types of judicial remedy-

3) Specific restitution of property

Types of extrajudicial remedy-

2) Re-entry on land.

3) Expulsion of the trespasser.

Types of judicial and extra-judicial remedies

Judicial remedies

1- Damages- In this suit for damages the courts grant monetary compensation to the plaintiff for damage suffered by him due to the defendant. Damages are granted once for all, the plaintiff can not approach the court for the second action for the same case simply because his injury proved to more serious as thought before. If more than one right is violated they all need to be address in the same case, no two cases should be filed for the same facts.

2- Injunction- It is an order passed by the court to restrict the continuance of wrongful act or omission. With the change of the time, all courts can issue this order as per just and fair conditions applicable in the particular case. It is taken against trespass, passing off, nuisance etc. It can be demanded as right it depends on the discretion of the court. The court has the power to grant a mandatory injunction where the defendant is ordered to take positive actions in order to rectify his mistake.

Extra-judicial remedies

1- Self-help- It has been regarded as an individual implementing their rights without visiting higher authorities. But this kind of remedy cannot be regulated freely our legal system places different degrees of limitations on such self-help and law vary according to place. People opt for when feeling that they have no legal remedy left or courts are biased.

2- Re-entry on land – In this part, if a person is wrongfully and forcefully dispossessed of his land may take possession of the same by any means may be peacefully or forcefully. He will not be liable for trespass. But the force used should be reasonable and its consequences should be foreseeable. As long as civil rights are concerned possession of rightful owner gained by forced entry is lawful among the parties.

3- Expulsion of a trespasser- T he legal and rightful owner of a premise is entitled to drive out the trespasser as long as he does him no injury the owner must not resort to violence. He is entitled to use force but that force must not convert into violence.

Damages and its types

Damages is a first and foremost remedy in torts. They are not only confined to the loss which the plaintiff has suffered but also the satisfaction of the plaintiff accompanied by punishment for the wrongdoer to teach him a lesson. Damages are provided only when there are direct consequences of the wrongdoer act. The following test decides the quantum of damages be provided-

Causation- Whether the damage caused was raised by the wrongful act this question is decided by “but for” test. In it but for the defendant’s actions would the claimant has suffered the loss? If the answer to this question is yes then the defendant is not liable and if the answer is yes the defendant is liable. It is a causal relationship between conduct and result

Foreseeability- It would be unjust to a person if he/she is held liable for all the consequences of his act which includes unforeseeable events also, consequently the result would be endless. To overcome this issue, directness is the perfect test, in it we test the foreseeability and direct consequences of the act ignoring the indirect ones. The act done must be in the ambit of a common man to think its consequence.

Types of damages

a) Contemptuous damages- These types of damages are given in trifling matters where court think that such matter should not be brought before courts. In such cases court forms a low opinion of the plaintiff’s claim and award not more than a negligible amount of money such as court had awarded 1 rupee or even one and half of a rupee in some cases.

c) Real damages- This kind of damages are granted in those cases where real damages are incurred that needed to be compensated by the defendant. The main purpose is to make the plaintiff in the same position as he was before the damage has incurred.

Analysing the important cases in the law of torts

Facts- The plaintiffs were tenants of the land on which they work a mine. Their working extended through underground shafts to an area below neighbouring land. The defendants were neighbouring mill owners and they have constructed a reservoir for mill operations. The reservoir was not strong enough to bear the pressure of water consequently it burst downwards and flooded the plaintiff’s mineshaft.

Judgement- According to BLACKBURN, J in his words – the rule of law is that person who, for his own purpose brings on his land and keeps there anything likely to do mischief if escapes must keep it in his peril and is prima facie liable for all the damages for its escape. In this case, a dangerous thing in premise escapes and the defendant is liable for punitive

Facts- A was the owner of a sugar factory. B owned land adjacent to A’s sugar factory. A stored quantity of molasses and it escaped to B’s land and damaged B’s crops. B sued A.

Judgement- Collection of molasses in large quantities are considered to be non-natural use of land and its escape can make a person liable.

Facts- The claimant i.e Smt. Shyama Devi filed a suit against the State Bank of India in Tribunal and High court asking for the refund of money which she asked the company’s employee in to deposit in her account. The Tribunal asked the bank to pay Rs 10,040 whereas the latter asked to pay Rs 14,145.

Judgement- The decision was made in favour of the Appellant by the Supreme Court. Dealing with the first issue if Mr Shukla was in the course of employment court concluded that he was not in course of employment it was by the respondent that he was chosen as a mediator. The Supreme Court hence dismissed the plaintiff’s claim with regard to Rs 11,000 (4,000 plus 7,000) and interest thereon. The decretal amount granted by the High Court shall be reduced by Rs 11,000 and interests thereon. No order as to costs.

Facts- The plaintiff contended that the film “Jai Santoshi Maa” hurt the religious feelings of the plaintiff in so far as Goddesses Saraswati, Laxmi, and Parvati was depicted as jealous and was ridiculed and thus sued for a permanent injunction against the defendants to restrain them from exhibiting the film.

Judgement- It was observed that hurt religious feelings had not been recognized as a legal wrong. Moreover, no person has a legal right to enforce his religious views on another or to restrain another from doing a lawful act, merely because it did not fit in with the tenets of his particular religion.

The petitioner, an M.L.A. of Jammu & Kashmir, was wrongfully detained by the police while he was going to attend the Assembly session. Further, he was not produced before the Magistrate within the requisite period. As a consequence of this, he was deprived of his constitutional right to attend the Assembly session. There was also a violation of the fundamental right to personal liberty guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution.

By the time the petition was decided by the Supreme Court, Bhim Singh had been released, but by way of consequential relief, exemplary damages amounting to Rs. 50,000 were awarded to him.

Conclusion

On the concluding note, I would like to sum up that there are still many issues that are unattended and we will land up in dilemma if we try to solve them without any laws or precedents. Damages mainly depend upon the economic status of a country and mindset of society as till some extent thinking of the judges are affected what society thinks in cases related to civil laws. Damages show an easy way to get away with the mistakes committed by rich brats it is easy for them to pay monetary compensation for their mistakes in place of punishment it does give them a chance to realise their mistakes. In India, rules for the purpose of damages are not fully utilized as people are not commonly aware of it. Due to the remoteness of applicability, it is not well-developed law in India.

Torts arise from the negligent acts and lack burden of proof in some instances plaintiff may prevail in a tort case despite the fact that person who has caused harm is acquitted in a criminal case this can lead us to the principle of double jeopardy. There are also some loopholes in judicial and extra-judicial remedies as in judicial remedy we can measure the term reasonable foreseeability and compensation provided in monetary is sufficient or not and in extra-judicial remedies exceeding the reasonability in once right can show him the way to jail and it can be a measure that how much is too much. These are some issues which still need to be addressed in the law of torts.

Bibliography

1-DHIRAJLAL, R. A. (1987). THE LAW OF TORTS (27 ed.). (J. G. SINGH, Ed.) LEXISNEXIS. Retrieved AUGUST 2017, from WWW.LEXISNEXIS.CO.IN

2-GOUDKAMP, W. P. (2015). WINFIELD AND JOLOWICZ ON TORTS (18 ed.). THOMSON REUTERS. Retrieved AUGUST 2017

3-HEDLEY, S. (2016). TORT (7 ed.). OXFORD. Retrieved AUGUST 2017

4-PANDEY, J. N. (2016). LAW OF TORTS WITH CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT AND MOTOR VEHICLE ACT. CENTRAL LAW PUBLICATION. Retrieved AUGUST 2017

5-SINGH, j. G. (2010). THE LAW OF TORTS (26 ed.). LEXISNEXIS.

6-STEELE, J. (2017). TORT LAW (3 ed.). OXFORD. Retrieved AUGUST 2017

7-WITTING, J. M. (2016). STREET ON TORTS (13 ed.). OXFORD. Retrieved AUGUST 2017

Capital punishment: for and against.

The difference between torts and crimes.

Criminal law, sometimes, involves the prosecutionby the state of a person for an act that has been classified as a crime. These contrasts with civil law, which involves private individuals and organizations seeking to resolve legal disputes. Prosecutions are initiated by the state through a prosecutor, while in a civil case the victimbrings the suit.

An important difference between the law of tort and criminal law is that the main purpose of the law of tort is to compensate people who suffer harm and not to punish people who caused this harm.

Различие между правонарушениями и преступлениями.

Уголовное право, иногда, включает в себя обвинение со стороны государства за деяние, которое было квалифицировано как преступление. Это противоречит гражданскому праву, в котором участвуют частные лица и организации, стремящиеся разрешить юридические споры. Преследование инициируется государством через прокурора, а в гражданском случае жертва подает иск.

Важное различие между законом деликта и уголовного права является то, что основной целью закона является деликта, чтобы компенсировать людям, которые страдают вред, а не наказывать людей, которые вызвали этот вред.

The «McLibel» case.

The longest case in either criminal or civil history. The claimant in the McLibel case was McDonald’s, the chain of fast food restaurants.

The defendants in this case, Helen Steel and David Moris, belonged to a group of people who were worried about the environment and about the way that certain large corporations were behaving in relation to the environment. The group decided that the best way to tell public about this was to give out leaflets containing information about the problem.

They gave leaflets to people who were in the area. The problem was that the leaflets contained some very controversial claims. For example, the leaflet said that McDonald’s was partly to blame for the destruction of rainforests. It also claimed that McDonald’s food was unhealthy and eating too much of this food could give people health problems later in life.

Дело МакЛайбела

Cамый длинный случай в криминальной или гражданской истории. Заявителем в деле McLibel был McDonald’s, сеть ресторанов быстрого питания.

Они дали листовки людям, которые были в этом районе. Проблема заключалась в том, что в листовках содержались весьма противоречивые утверждения. Например, в листовке говорилось, что McDonald’s частично виноват в уничтожении тропических лесов. Оно также востребовало что еда McDonald’s была нездоровой и ел слишком много этой еды может дать людям проблемы здоровья более поздно в жизни.

Суд присудил Хелену и Дэвиду убытки в размере почти 47 000 долларов.

What is the law of tort?

The law of tort deals with civil wrongs. A wrong is something that causes harm or damage to another person. The word ‘harm’ and ‘damage’ have the same meaning. A person who suffers harm or damage is hurt in some way. This hurt might be physical in nature, but it might be some other type of hurt, such as causing someone to lose money. This area of law is based on the following principle. In situations where I cause harm to another person, I may be liable to compensate him or her that harm, even in situations when: I do not have a contract with that person and I did not commit a criminal act against that person.

The law of tort says that I must not harm another person either because I choose to harm him or her, or because I was not careful enough. In other words, I am liable for any harm that I cause to another person either from having intention to cause him, or from negligence.

Что такое закон деликта?

Закон деликта говорит, что я не должен причинить вред другому лицу либо потому, что я хочу причинить ему вред или ее, или потому, что я не был достаточно осторожен. Другими словами, я ответственность за любой вред, который я причинить другому человеку, либо от того, намерения причинить ему или небрежности.

Capital punishment: for and against.

Supporters of capital punishment believe that death is a just punishment for certain serious crimes. Many also believe that it deters others from committing such crimes. Opponents argue that execution is cruel and uncivilized. Capital punishment involves not only the pain of dying but also the sentence will be carried out. Opponents also argue that there is no evidence that it deters people from committing murder any more than imprisonment does. A further argument is that, should a mistake be made, it is too late to rectify it once the execution has taken place.

Смертная казнь: за и против

Different types of tort.

A tort is a civil wrong that can be remedied by awarding damages (other remedies may also be available). These civil wrongs result in harm to a person or property that forms the basis of a claim by the injured party. The harm can be physical, emotional or financial. Examples of torts include medical negligence, negligent damage to private property and negligent misstatements causing financial loss.

There are many specific torts, such as trespass, assault and negligence. Business torts include fraudulent misrepresentation, interference in contractual relations and unfair business practices.

Torts fall into three general categories: intentional torts (e.g. unfair competition), negligent torts (e.g. causing an accident by failing to obey traffic rules) and strict liability torts (e.g. liability for making and selling defective products).

Различные виды деликта

Деликт является гражданским правонарушением, которое может быть исправлено путем присуждения убытков (другие средства правовой защиты также могут быть доступны). Эти гражданские правонарушения приводят к нанесению вреда человеку или имуществу, которая лежит в основе иска потерпевшей стороной. Вред может быть физическим, эмоциональным или финансовым. Примеры деликтов включают медицинскую халатность, небрежное ущерб частной собственности и небрежной неточности вызывают финансовые потери.

Есть много конкретных правонарушений, например проступок, нападение и халатности. Бизнес правонарушения включают в себя намеренное введение в заблуждение, вмешательства в договорные отношения и недобросовестную деловую практику.

Дата добавления: 2018-06-01 ; просмотров: 2477 ; Мы поможем в написании вашей работы!

Reading 1. What is Tort Law

A tort is a civil wrong other than a breach of contract. This wrong causes harm to a person or property and may be physical, emotional or financial. Tort law has two aims: to redress a wrong and to stop potential tortfeasors from committing such wrongs.

The most common remedy in tort law is monetary damages. The injured party may also sue for injunction to stop tortious conduct.

There are three categories of torts: intentional torts (e.g. assault and battery), negligent torts (e.g. a traffic accident, caused by failing to obey traffic rules) and strict liability torts (e.g. making and selling defective products).

While a crime is committed against society, a tort is committed against an individual. Torts are handled in the civil courts where the injured party brings an action against the wrongdoer.

The party who brings an action in tort is called the claimant (plaintiff, US) and the other party is called the defendant. Unlike in criminal cases, where the defendant may be found guilty and punished, in tort cases the defendant may be found liable and ordered to pay compensatory damages and sometimes punitive damages.

Compensatory damages compensate the victim for the harm, and punitive damages punish the tortfeasor.

Exercise 1. Answer the questions based on the text.

2. What are the aims of tort law?

3. What are the remedies available at tort law?

4. What are the three categories of torts? Give examples.

5. How is a tort different from a crime?

6. How is an action in tort started and what are the parties to the case called?

7. What is the difference between the outcomes in criminal cases and cases in tort?

8. What are the two types of damages awarded in a tort case and what are their purposes?

Exercise 2. Match the words and word combinations with their synonyms.

Exercise 3. Match the words to make word combinations (there may be several options).

Exercise 4. Fill in the gaps with suitable words from the text.

1.Making and selling …………products is a strict…………tort.

2.A defendant may be…………to pay damages to the………….

3.Compensatory damages compensate the …………party for the…………suffered.

4.Monetary damages is the most common …………in tort law.

5. The …………. who …………an action in tort is called the claimant.

Exercise 5. Fill in the gaps with suitable prepositions.

1. to cause harm …. a person; 2.to stop …. committing wrongs; 3.to sue …. injunction; 4. to commit a crime …. society; 5.to bring an action …. a wrongdoer; 6.to result …. fine; 7.to compensate …. the harm.

Reading 2.

Read the case Liebeck v. McDonald’s Restaurants and complete the glossary

Case study: Liebeck v. McDonald’s Restaurants

Part 1.

In 1992, Stella Liebeck, a 79-year-old woman from New Mexico bought coffee from a Macdonald’s drive through restaurant. While parked, she put the cup between her legs and accidentally spilled the hot drink on her lap. Stella suffered serious burns over 16 per cent of her body and had to be hospitalised for 8 days. Her daughter had to look after her for three more weeks and the medical treatment lasted for over two years.

The case Liebeck v. Macdonald’s Restaurants follows several stages which are listed below. Try to identify each stage.

The case gave rise to the attacks on “frivolous lawsuits” in the United States. Here is some of the evidence that the jury heard at the trial.

Decide which arguments are for the claimant and which for the defence. They are in the jumbled order. Put them in the table below.

· The coffee was served at a dangerously hot temperature of 180-190F (82-88C) and was likely to cause serious injury.

· She was the passenger in the parked car.

· Nobody wants to admit that it was her own fault, when such things happen there is always somebody else to blame.

· The company received more than 600 previous reports of injury from its coffee but was not taking it seriously.

· The reason why the company served coffee at this temperature was that people wanted it hot; otherwise it might be sued for coffee being too cold.

· The company was aware of the potential risk to consumers but refused to change its policy.

· Such huge verdicts promote compensation culture in the US.

· The number of injuries is insignificant compared to the billions of coffee cups sold per year.

· The company admitted that it did not warn consumers of the potential risk.

· The punitive damages amounted to about 2 days of revenue for McDonald’s coffee sales.

Exercise 8. Go through the case notes again and find more arguments for and against the judgment for Stella Liebeck.

Exercise 9. Consider the arguments carefully and give your own judgement.

Exercise 10. Word building. Complete the following table, using the dictionary if necessary.

Exercise 11. Choose one of the words from the table to complete the following sentences.

1. A woman filed a __________ against Starbucks for allegedly serving her too much ice in the drink. She _____________ that iced coffee contains too little caffeine.

2. In law, _______________ is an agreement between the litigating parties, reached before or after the court action begins. It may be preferable ____________ the case to avoid legal costs or high punitive _________________.

3. The court ruled that the defendant cannot be ______________ again for the same offence on double jeopardy grounds.

4. _____________ are a sum of money awarded by the court to be paid by the court to the victim as a compensation for the harm or loss.

5. If a party does not agree with the verdict given, it can ___________ it.

6. The leaking roof seriously _____________ the tenant’s furniture and he _____________ the landlord claiming negligence.

12. Problem solving

Negligent torts are when the defendant’s actions were unreasonably unsafe or careless. Negligence is the most prominent tort liability. Negligence acts include car accidents, clinical negligence, worker’s negligence, and product liability cases. There are five elements that must be proven by the plaintiff to establish negligence:

· The plaintiff was owed a duty of care through a special relationship (e.g. doctor-patient) or some other principle

· There was a dereliction or breach of that duty

· The tortfeasor directly caused the injury [but for the defendant’s actions, the plaintiff would not have suffered an injury].

· The plaintiff suffered damage as a result of that breach

§ The damage was not too remote; there was proximate cause to show the breach caused the damage

Problem: Woman v. Act of God:

What would be your ruling in this case? Consider the five elements of negligence. *

Последнее изменение этой страницы: 2019-06-19; Просмотров: 390; Нарушение авторского права страницы