Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Essay on tort laws
In this presentation we will talk about law of Torts .
Tort is a wrong that involves a breach of civil duty owed to someone else.
A person who suffers harm or damage is hurt in some way,hurt might be physical or it might be some other type of hurt. For example : person who shopping in supermarket and employee of the supermartket washed the floor ten minutes ago and floor is not dry,there is no sign to warn person that floor is wet,person slip on the floor and hurt leg and then he have to go to hospital, in spite of it he can not go to work for three week, in this situation he need to make a claim based on the principles of the law of tort. In this situation we have a person have physically hurt and he lost money,because of someone else’s
…show more content…
“Tort” means “wrong” and it is natural to think that wrongs are the domain of tort law.
Tort law does not concern itself with all the wrongs that people do,some wrongs are addressed by the criminal law ,not private law . (https://seop.illc.uva.nl/entries/tort-theories/)
“ WHAT IS TORT LAW ?
Tort are wrongs,these wrongs include an intentional punch,all torts involve conduct that falls below some legal standard.
The list of tortious wrongs is very long.
In almost all cases, the defendant is in some sense at fault,either because he instends harm or because he takes unreasonable risks of harm.
In all tort cases,the defendant’s wrong results in a harm to another person,that the law is willing to say constitutes a legan injury
The injured person is said to have a “cause of action”, that is, a claim against the person who committed the tort, this claim can be pursued in court.
A breach of contract is often grounds for a lawsuit,but a breach of contract is often not considered to be a tort at all, it must ordinarily be redressed under the rules for contracts , not the rules for
…show more content…
Non-tort systems- physical injuries inflicted by one person upon another are commonly addressed by tort law ,but there are alternatives to tort law .
THE AIMS AND APPROACHES IN TORT LAW – JUSTICE AND POLICY,COMPENSATION AND DETERRENCE
Morality or ccorrective justice-Particular aims of tort law are usually erected under one of two large systems of thought.
The first bases tort law on moralresponsibility or corrective justice. It attempts to hold defendants liable for harms they wrongfully caused and no others.
Social utility or policy- The second large system of thought reverses the emphasis ; it bases tort law on social policy or a good-for-all-of-us view.
Process – one kind of utility or social policy is inward looking. Rules must be made with legal process itself mind. They must be kind of rules judges and juries can understand and apply in a practical way,and they must not leave too much to the judge’s or the jury’s discretion.
Potential conflicts- the first two ways of looking at tort law are usually regarded as antithetical to each other. The legal processs view might also conflict with the aims of justice or those of policy.
...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
However, after looking at the facts, and the ruling, Dworkin's theory of law and judicial reasoning provides us with the most satisfactory explanation, and also shows that rulings, when applying social principles are meant to enhance society and bring about social growth.
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
Fletcher’s paradigm of reciprocity is a model that describes when liability for an act is shifted from one party to another – in the case of tort liability from victim to defendant. The paradigm discusses two issues. The first issue is whether or not the victim has a right to recovery from an injury. The outcome of the first issue – whether or not the victim has a right to recovery – is dependent on both the actions of the victim and the danger posed by the defendant at the time of the injury. If the actions of the victim posed as much danger to the defendant as the actions of the defendant posed to the victim then there would be no transference of liability. Both parties would be at fault in this case. However, if the actions of the victim did not pose as much danger to the defendant as the actions of the defendant posed to the victim then liability would be transferred to the defendant. When the danger that each party exhibits on one another is unequal there has to be transference of liability. This leads into the second issue that is discussed by the paradigm.
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.
Tort reform is very controversial issue. From the plaintiff’s perspective, tort reforms seems to take liability away from places such as insurance companies and hospitals which could at times leave the plaintiff without defense. From the defendant’s perspective, tort reform provides a defense from extremely large punitive damage awards. There seems to be no median between the two. Neither side will be satisfied. With the help of affiliations such as the American Tort Reform Association and Citizens Against Lawsuit Abuse, many businesses and corporations are working to change the current tort system to stop these high cash awards.
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
It is difficult to define the absolute meaning of tort because the meaning changes as society changes.
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.
Describe tort law and the types of damages in a tort lawsuit. Provide two examples of tort damages in the business environment.
Assume now that injurers are subject to liability, but that insurance is again unavailable; thus, injurers do not possess liability insurance coverage and victims do not hold accident coverage. In this situation, the outcome is, in essence, that injurers will be led to reduce risk due to the effect of liability, but the allocation of risk will depend on whether the form of liability is strict or the negligence rule. In particular, under strict liability injurers will have a motive to reduce risk and victims will, by definition, be compensated for any losses they sustain; it is injurers who will bear risk. If injurers are risk-neutral, their bearing of risk will not matter, and the outcome will be socially ideal. But if strictly liable injurers
On the other hand tort law is a civil law which are some general standards of civic conduct. The focus of tort law is what the tort feaser can do about the financial harm that the victim has suffered. Another difference
In certain cases the same incident may give rise to liability both in contract and in tort. For example, when a passenger whilst traveling with a ticket is injured owing to the negligence of the railway company, the company is liable for a wrong which is both a tort and a breach of a
In this part we are considering two major legal systems, common law and civil law; the first one is neither written or codified it is mainly based on the decisions already made by judges on previous similar cases, it is the system applied by the U.S and the U.K, where a judge makes a decision about a certain case with the help of a jury composed of normal, responsible, and sane group of people from the community. The second system is known as the civil law which is the exact opposite of the common law, it is based on written statutes, countries that use this system base their decisions on a case based on facts and investigations, actually they use codes named Legal codes, those codes determine “all matters