A tort is an act or omission that gives rise to injury or harm to another and amounts to a civil wrong for which courts impose liability (Staff, 2007). The primary aims of tort law are to provide relief to injured parties for harms caused by others, to impose liability on parties responsible for the harm, and to deter others from committing harmful acts. Torts can shift the burden of loss from the injured party to the party who is at fault or better suited to bear the burden of the loss (Staff, 2007). Typically, a party seeking redress through tort law will ask for damages in the form of monetary compensation. Less common remedies include injunction and restitution (Staff, 2007). The boundaries of tort law are defined by common law and state statutory law. Judges, in interpreting the language of statutes, have wide latitude in …show more content…
Issues such as causation, responsibility, retribution and reasonableness are a few areas of concentration (May, p. 303). Much modern thought on causation in the law rest on the contention that the statement that someone has caused harm either means no more than that the harm would not have happened without ("but for") his /her action (May, p, 308). To demonstrate causation in tort law, the claimant must establish that the loss they have suffered was caused by the defendant. In most cases a simple application of the 'but for' test will resolve the question of causation in tort law. I.e. 'but for' the defendant's actions, would the claimant have suffered the loss? If yes, the defendant is not liable. If no, the defendant is liable. Causation may be problematic where there exists more than one possible cause (lawresources, 2017). Every event which would not have happened if an earlier event had not happened is the consequences of that earlier event. Some lawyers have been known to say this is "the philosophical doctrine" (May, p.
...ulations in the U.S. judicial system is “most define the law as a system of principles and processes by which people in a society deal with disputes and problems, seeking to solve or settle them without resorting to force” (p. 15). Some situations cannot be rectified in a board meeting. However, negligence is in the category of objectives of tort law, it is also the most popular lawsuit pursued by patients against medical professionals against doctors and healthcare organizations (Bal, 2009). Objectives of Tort Law
The refinement of this definition has significant legal implications, as it broadens the scope of those who can sue within blameless accidents. Prior to this, such victims would also face being labelled with “fault”. Supporting the findings of Axiak, by establishing non-tortious conduct as separate from “fault”, similar, future cases are more likely to proceed despite the plaintiff’s contributory
In other words, the addition of two additional elements -- legal causation and damages -- are necessary before medical negligence will give rise to a viable medical malpractice lawsuit. If the doctor’s medical negligence was not a foreseeable result of the patient’s harm (causation), or if the doctor’s medical negligence actually had no detrimental effect on the patient’s condition (damages), a medical malpractice claim will fall short. To learn more about the legal issues, see When It’s Malpractice, and When It Isn’t.
In this essay about tort law, I talked about a tort case that has personally impacted me. To do this, I provided a background of the event, applied facts of the case to applicable law, summarized lessons of the week as they related to this case and provided a plausible argument for the parties involved. This is a prime example of breach of a tort law and the case is currently in the process of litigation. It is likely that the parties involved will reach an agreement out of court but may in fact be brought to trial.
This essay focuses on intentional tort, which includes trespass to person consisting of battery, assault and false imprisonment, which is actionable per se. It also examines protection from harassment act. The essay commences with a brief description of assault, battery and false imprisonment. It goes further advising the concerned parties on the right to claim they have in tort law and the development of the law over the years, with the aid of case law, principles and statutes.
Tort, one of the crucial subjects of study when analyzing common law jurisdictions. Tort, is an action which causes another person or party to suffer harm or loss []. The person who has committed a tortious act is called the tortfeasor while the person who suffered harm or loss from such act is called the injured party or the victim. Although crimes may be torts, torts may not be crimes [] simply because a tort may not have broken a law. In fact, one must understand that the key idea of tort is not to punish the tortfeasor(s) but rather to compensate the victim(s).
Negligence, as defined in Pearson’s Business Law in Canada, is an unintentional careless act or omission that causes injury to another. Negligence consists of four parts, of which the plaintiff has to prove to be able to have a successful lawsuit and potentially obtain compensation. First there is a duty of care: Who is one responsible for? Secondly there is breach of standard of care: What did the defendant do that was careless? Thirdly there is causation: Did the alleged careless act actually cause the harm? Fourthly there is damage: Did the plaintiff suffer a compensable type of harm as a result of the alleged negligent act? Therefore, the cause of action for Helen Happy’s lawsuit will be negligence, and she will be suing the warden of the Peace River Correctional Centre, attributable to vicarious liability. As well as, there will be a partial defense (shared blame) between the warden and the two employees, Ike Inkster and Melvin Melrose; whom where driving the standard Correction’s van.
after suffering harm from the acts of the other party (Turner, 2013). A tort is a civil wrong
Tort is a word developed to describe in general the different types of claims that are normally imposing economic and financial losses that are because of some kind of misbehavior, apart from breach of contract. The term is used to refer to this type of claims, false presentations, fraud, breach of contract, encouragement, unfair competition, trade name and trademark infringement and interference with business relationships (Emanuel, S.
Considerable effort has been expended in attempts to identify the purpose of the law of torts. However, the range of interests protected by the law of torts makes any search for a single aim underlying the law a difficult one. For example, actions for wrongful interference with goods or trespasses to land serve fundamentally different ends from an action seeking compensation for a personal injury. Nevertheless, following the research I have carried out the fundamental purpose of the law of torts is to achieve compensation and appeasement and to obtain deterrence and justice, in order to determine the conditions under which certain losses may be shifted to persons who created the risks which in some way led to the losses. In doing so, the law of torts attempts to balance the utility of a particular type of conduct against the harm it may cause. During the course of this essay I will discuss each function separately and I will investigate how each function achieves its individual resolution of a tort.
did owe a duty of care to Mrs. Donoghue, in that it was up to them to...
Intentional tort is an act of civil wrong as a results from a person committing an offence which results in causing physical injury or harm to the victim. One of the main elements of intentional torts is the intent of the wrongdoer. With clear intent to commit the offence, the wrongdoer can be charged under the intentional tort. Intentional tort contains element of intent other torts do not have. A person who is affected by legal damages or injury may use tort law to gain compensation from the individual who is responsible, or liable for that affliction. To commit intentional torts, it means that you must do something on purpose or with a clear intent or desire. However the person who commit intentional tort need not have the intent to harm
Damages – if the other party cause’s drastic damages that cost the other party or affect it negatively than the other party can sue and take them to court of law, and the court may claim that the affected party may be paid and be taken back to its original position as it was
Negligence is a concept that was passed from Great Britain to the United States. It arose out of common law, which is made up of court decisions that considered whether a defendant had an obligation to act with greater care. It is conduct which falls below the standard established by law for the protection of others against unreasonable risk of harm and involves a failure to fulfill a duty that causes injury to another. Many torts depend on whether there was intent but negligence does not. Negligence looks to see whether the person had a duty to act with care. It emphasizes the need for people to act reasonably in society. This is important because accidents will happen. Negligence helps the law establish whether these accidents could have been avoided, if there was a breach of duty to act reasonably, and if that breach was the cause of injury to that person. By focusing on the conduct rather than the intent of the defendant, the tort of negligence reflects society’s desire to
In our given scenario we are asked to discuss legal principles influencing the likelihood of any successful action against Steve in the grounds of negligence. Steve’s negligent driving caused a series of events that caused losses to the other people presented in the scenario and they take actions against Steve in the grounds of negligence. At first we must understand what negligence is. The tort of negligence provides the potenti...