Ch 4 - The law of Torts Flashcards
What constitutes false imprisonment? False arrest? Malicious prosecution? **
False imprisonment consists of intentionally restraining a person, without lawful justification, either by causing his confinement or preventing him from leaving his location
> Belief that one cannot leave is sufficient
> example from shoplifting: overzelous store staff.
False arrest is causing a person to be arrested without reasonable cause.
Malicious prosecution is causing a person to be prosecuted for a crime without an honest belief that the crime was committed
Describe the difference between fair comment and responsible communication on matters of public interest
Fair comment is when the publication of a researched and reasonably held opinion that is honestly believed to be true turns out to not be. This is a defense open to journalists
Responsible communication on matters of public interest is broader and applies when a matter is of substantial concern to segments of the public and when inclusion of a defamatory statement is important for the fact that it was made, not its truth. (ie. the reporting of a defamatory statement)
Both of these defenses are blocked if the reporting is done with malice
What are the requirements for establishing that the tort of unlawful interference with economic interests has been committed?
unlawful interference with economic relations is the attempting by threats or other unlawful means to induce one person to discontinue business with another
The elements are both the intention to interfere with business and the use of unlawful means (conduct triggering civil liability under common law)
What is the concept of Remoteness of damage?
Remoteness of damage is the term that is used to indicate that although the carelessness of a person has been a cause of the harm suffered by the plaintiff, nevertheless the harm is so far removed, is so remote, from the wrongdoing that the wrongdoer should not be legally liable for it.
What is the “material contribution” test?
The “material contribution” test allows an injured party to avoid the need to prove “but for” causation and only requires proof that the negligent action materially contributed to the risk of harm
