T6 tort law Flashcards
breach definition
broken ones obligations
damages definition
compensation/money
tortfeasor definition
one who commits a tort
tortious definition
having the nature of a tort; wrongful act
what does tortious liability arise from
Tortious liability arises from breach of duty imposed by law; and its breach is resolved by an action for unliquidated damages.
the aim of tort damages
> So far as possible, to place the injured party into the position (financially) they would be if the tort had never been committed.
The common law remedy, as of right, to the successful
time limit to bring claim for damages:
> 3 years: personal injury
6 years: all other torts
tort law covers situations such as:
> somebody injured in a road traffic accident;
a famous actor libelled by a newspaper;
an employee injured at work;
a landowner who has had a trespasser on his or her land; or
a patient who is injured by a negligent doctor.
defences: CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE, volenti non fit injuria, ex turpi causa- non oritur actio
contributory negligence is when the claimant has contributed to the extent of his/her own suffering through their own negligent actions
> effect of it: damages are reduced by percentage amount
Partial defence:
where harm is attributable partly to the fault of the defendant and partly to that of the claimant; any award of damages may be reduced by reason of the claimant’s
contributory negligence; but never by 100%!!
case example: Jackson v Murray 2015
Facts:
The claimant, who was 13-years-old at the time, stepped out from behind of the school minibus into the path of the defendant’s car. Defendant was driving under the speed limit but he was driving still faster than what would be reasonable having noticed school bus on the road. However, the accident was solely caused by the ‘recklessness’ of the claimant. In the present action, the claimant claimed damages for personal injuries and defendant alleged that there was contributory negligence.
Issues:
Above all, was there contributory negligence by the claimant?
Held:
The Supreme Court reduced damages by 50% for contributory negligence. The Court found that it was right to have regard to the youth of the claimant in contributory negligence cases. In Jackson v Murray, Lord Reed held: ‘regard has to be had to the circumstances of the pursuer [viz, C]. … [S]he was aged only 13 at the time, and a 13 year old will not necessarily have the same level of judgment and self-control as an adult.’ Furthermore, previous courts erred in assessing contributory negligence at 90% or 70%, proper assessment would to at 50%
defences: contributory negligence, VOLENTI NON FIT INJURIA, ex turpi causa- non oritur actio
To he who consents no harm is done
e.g. of someone who has consented to an injury: sports participants/spectators
2 types of situations:
- consent to the inflection of harm
- consent to the risk of harm inflicted accidentally
case example: Morris v Murray [1991]
Facts
After drinking alcohol the whole afternoon, the plaintiff and his friend decided to go on a flight in the friend’s light aircraft. The plaintiff drove a car to the airfield and helped to start and refuel the aircraft which was piloted by the friend. Shortly after the take-off of the aircraft, the aircraft crashed. The pilot was killed and the plaintiff was severely injured. The plaintiff sued the defendant’s personal representatives for negligence. The defendants succeeded in claiming contributory negligence, but failed in claiming the defence of volenti non fit injuria. The defendants appealed to the Court of Appeal.
Issues
Does the maxim volenti non fit injuria apply as a defence to the plaintiff’s negligence claim?
Decision/Outcome
The appeal was allowed.
defences: contributory negligence, volenti non fit injuria, EX TURPI CAUSA NON ORITUR ACTIO
It is when an action cannot be founded on an illegal act.
if the doctrine applies, the claimant is unable to pursue his cause of action
the principle prevents a criminal from bringing a claim against a fellow criminal
case example: Vellino v Chief Constable of Greater Manchester [2001]
Facts
The plaintiff was well known to the local police, which were often called to arrest him at his second-floor flat. He sometimes evaded the arrests by jumping from his kitchen balcony or hanging from it and after that dropping to the ground. After failing to appear in court one day, the police were sent to visit his address with an arrest warrant. A noisy party was taking place at the claimant’s flat. He was arrested after a struggle in which one of the guests at the party punched the sergeant, but the constable held onto it. It was not clear what happened next, but the plaintiff managed to jump off a bedroom window which led to him fracturing his skull and suffering severe brain damage and tetraplegia. The plaintiff brought an action against the Chief Constable, claiming that the police officers had failed to prevent him from harming himself. The trial judge ruled in favour of the defendants. The plaintiff appealed to the Court of Appeal.
Issue
Do the police owe an arrested person a duty of care that he is not injured in a foreseeable attempt for him to escape custody?
Held
The appeal was dismissed.
