Identify and discuss the legal concept of tort. A tort is simply a civil wrong. There are three general types of torts that may cause injury to another person: Intentional tort, negligence tort, and strict liability tort. In civil law, torts are grounds for lawsuits to compensate a grieving party for any damages or injuries suffered. To simplify this, let 's say while walking down the aisle of a grocery store, you slip on a banana that had fallen from a shelf. You become the plaintiff, or injured party, and the grocery store is considered the tortfeasor or defendant, the negligent party. (http://study.com/academy/lesson/what-is-tort-law-definition-and-examples.html) Here is the difference between the three types of torts:
1) Intentional: an act that is intentionally committed against another person with the aim of causing harm. There are several intentional torts
…show more content…
Robert intentionally diluted drugs for patients for the purpose of monetary gain. This is known as a counterfeit drug. A counterfeit medication or a counterfeit drug is a medication or pharmaceutical product which is produced and sold with the intent to deceptively represent its origin, authenticity or effectiveness. A counterfeit drug may contain inappropriate quantities of active ingredients, or none, may be improperly processed within the body (e.g., absorption by the body), may contain ingredients that are not on the label (which may or may not be harmful), or may be supplied with inaccurate or fake packaging. Medicines which are deliberately mislabeled to deceive consumers—including mislabeled but otherwise genuine generic drugs—are counterfeit. Counterfeit drugs are related to pharma fraud. Drug manufacturers and distributors are increasingly investing in countermeasures, such as traceability and authentication technologies, to try to minimize the impact of counterfeit drugs.
Damages are a fundamental principle in the American legal system. However, a number of recent cases in the United States have sparked a debate on the issue, the most famous one being the “hot coffee lawsuit”1. In 1994, Stella Liebeck bought coffee at a McDonald’s restaurant, spilt it, and was severely burnt. She sued the McDonald’s company, received $160,000 in compensatory damages, and $2.9 million in punitive damages. A judge then reduced the punitive damages to $480,000. The final out-of-court settlement was of approximately $500,000. For many, this case is frivolous (meaning that the plaintiff’s prospects of being successful were low or inexistent), but it really highlights the question of excessive punitive damages compared to the damage suffered and its causes.
...dividuals from themselves. Moreover, a failure to anticipate the potential negligence of other individuals, particularly where the harms are potentially quite high as is the case in motor vehicle accidents, is probably a failure of the duty of care that one holds for one’s self. A reasonable person would probably anticipate and take precautions against these harms and it is important that the legal system is consistent in the application of the principles of reasonable precautions.
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).
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.
Tort reformers believe that courts must reduce the ability of defendants’ liability in order to avoid economic decline. In the years to come, the proposals likely to generate the biggest dispute include malpractice and class-action reform, limits on noneconomic and punitive damages, and a legislative solution to asbestos legation (Rushmann, 2006). There are many lawsuits. But the frivolous lawsuits should not be taken seriously and not cost our courts and citizens time and/or money.
As I mentioned above there are 3 elements of civil wrong, the first element is wrong (civil wrong), a civil wrong occurs when a person’s action, or a failure to take action, causes an injury to another person. The name for this type of wrong is a “tort.” The law calls a failure to take action an “omission.” A tort may be intentional or accidental. In either case, liability for a civil wrong results from one person’s unreasonable interference with the interests of another person
A tort is considered to be a civil wrong from which injury occurs to another person whether it is intentional or accidental. For such an offense, monetary value is the usual form of remedy. A classification of torts is that of negligence. “The tort of negligence allocates rights to individuals who have suffered damage, to their property or themselves, against a party that has failed to take reasonable care for that person’s safety” (Adams 2008). For an individual to have a successful claim in the tort of negligence, there must be proof of the duty of care, failure to perform that duty and damage suffered. Duty of care means that the claimant should show that the defendant should have thought about them (the claimant)
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.
did owe a duty of care to Mrs. Donoghue, in that it was up to them to...
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
Nicole stepped on Caroline mistakenly, which was an unlawful touching. According to Elliott and Quinn there are three elements to this intentional tort; force, direct application and intent which is so in this case. However, according to Croom-Johnson LJ in the case of Wilson v Pringle “the first distinction between two causes of action where there is personal injury is the element of contact between the claimant and the defendant; that is touching of sort. In the action of negligence, the physical contact (where it takes place at all) is normally through by no means always unintended” . In the action of trespass to constitute battery, it is deliberate. Even so, it is not very intended contact, which is tortious. Apart from in acting in self-defence), there are many examples in everyday life where an i...
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.
The U.S court system has numerous cases in it, they range from multi million dollar cases (including the bank crisis, or the car business for example) to less severe cases called torts. A tort is a legal term defined as “ A wrongful act that does not include breach of contract. This offense damages the injured parties property or reputation, leaving that party able to gain compensation.” (Dictionary.com) The book The King of Torts is about a man named Clay Carter. He has a stable job, it doesn’t pay as much as he wishes. He in the scheme of one week goes from making $100,000 a year to making $5,000,000 in one case. This is all because he filed something called a mass tort (also known as a class tort).
allow a remedy in a particular case as it would open the doors to many