Three lectures on:

Private Law:Tort Law:

Basic Concepts and Case Studies

Purposes of Tort Law

Restitutionor

Redistributing losses

Means of Tort Law

Compensation

Remedies

•Special damages•General damages•Future damages

•Exemplary damages•Aggravated damages•Punitive damages

Don’t c

opy

this

slide!

Remedies

•Special damages•General damages•Future damages•Aggravated damages

•Punitive damages•Exemplary damages

intentional tortsvs.

negligence

false imprisonment, malicious

prosecution

intentional infliction of nervous

shock

defamation (libel and slander)

trespass to land, trespass to

chattels

conversion of property

private nuisance, public

nuisance

misrepresentation, fraud

intentional interference with

intentional

torts

Example of definition of a Tort

BatteryBatteryBatteryBattery = direct, intentional, offensive or harmful contact

Elements:Elements:Elements:Elements:

1. Directness – burden of proof on Plaintiff

2. Intent – burden on Defendant

3. Offensiveness/harm – burden on P – objective test

4. Contact – burden on P

DefenceDefenceDefenceDefence::::

1. Consent – who bears the burden of proof?See Scalera on fault (P) vs. rights (D)

Negligence

Liability for not acting when

you should have done something

Negligence

Liability for not acting when

you should have done something

Duty of Care

Ask: “ Is there a duty of care?”

( Not: “What is the duty of care?” )

Test for Duty of Care

1. It is Reasonably Foreseeable that injury

will result from the action or inaction.

a) Proximity

b) Risk

c) Seriousness

2. Consider public policy reasons to limit

liability.

Standard of Care

Ask: “What is the standard of

care?”

( Not: “ Is there a standard of care?” )

Standard of Care

Generally,

only a reasonable amount

of care is expected.

Compensation in Negligence

•Physical injury•Mental injury accompanying physical injury•Mental injury alone?•Pure economic damage

…even if they have a “thin skull”

Defences in Tort

These include,

•Consent•Self−defence•Necessity•Truth (defence to defamation)

…and damages awarded are adjusted for

•Contributory negligence

Responsibility in Tort

•Vicarious liability•Subrogation•Strict Liability•Occupier’ s Liability

Case Studies

Smith v. Stone (1647),82 E.R. 533 (K.B.).

[intent and volition]

Gilbert v. Stone (1648),82 E.R. 539 (K.B.).

[duress]

Wilkinson v. Downton,[1897] 2 Q.B. 57.

[nervous shock]

Ngiam Kong Seng and Another

v. Lim Chiew Hock,[2008] SGCA 23.

[proximity in nervous shock]

Scott v. Shepherd,[1558-1774] All E.R.

296.

[directness]

Miska v. Sivec, (1959)

[provocation]

Bird v. Jones, (1845)Herd v. Weardale Steel,

(1915)Campbell v. SS Kresge Co.

(1976)

[false imprisonment]

Palsgraff v. Long Island Railway,

1928 NY CA.

[for negligence what needs to be foreseeable?]

Next class…

• Basic Criminal Law Concepts & Theory

•Pp. 84−88 and 263−274

• Put the final exam in your calendar:Dec 18, 2pm−5pm, in Colonel By Hall, rm B012