TL Flashcards
What constitutes trespass to land?
A: Unlawful, direct interference with the claimant’s possession of land.
Trespass to land involves unlawful, direct, and intentional interference with the claimant’s possession of land. This can include physical entry, placing objects on the land, or allowing animals to stray onto it. Example: Digging a tunnel under a neighbor’s land constitutes trespass to land due to direct interference.
What is battery in the context of trespass to the person?
A: The direct and intentional application of unlawful force to the claimant’s person.
Battery is the direct and intentional application of unlawful force to another person without their consent. This can range from physical contact to more invasive actions without consent. Example: Performing an additional medical procedure without the patient’s consent during surgery amounts to battery.
Define assault in tort law.
A: Intentional act causing the claimant reasonably to apprehend the immediate and direct infliction of unlawful force on their person.
Example: During a heated argument in a public park, Alex suddenly raises a fist towards Jordan, standing only a few feet away, and shouts, “I’m going to hit you right now!” Alex’s actions and threatening words cause Jordan to flinch and step back in fear of being struck immediately. Although Alex does not actually strike Jordan, the act of raising a fist in a threatening manner and the accompanying threat are sufficient to cause Jordan to reasonably apprehend an imminent and direct application of unlawful force, constituting an assault.
What is false imprisonment?
A: The unlawful constraint of the claimant’s freedom of movement from a particular place.
Example: Emma is shopping in a boutique when the store manager, mistakenly suspecting her of shoplifting, locks the front door and insists Emma cannot leave until the police arrive. Emma, with no other exits available, is forced to wait against her will, unable to leave the store. This act by the store manager constitutes false imprisonment, as Emma’s freedom of movement is unlawfully constrained, preventing her from leaving the store.
Explain trespass to goods.
A: Intentional and direct interference with the claimant’s possession of goods.
Example: Sam borrows a bicycle from Jamie for a quick ride around the block. Without Jamie’s permission, Sam decides to take the bicycle on a week-long trip out of town. Jamie, needing the bicycle for daily commutes, is deprived of its use during this time. Sam’s actions constitute an intentional and direct interference with Jamie’s possession of the bicycle, qualifying as trespass to goods.
What is conversion in tort law?
A: Dealing with goods in a way which is seriously inconsistent with the rights of the owner.
Example: Lisa lends her expensive camera to Mark for an afternoon photography session. Instead of returning it, Mark sells the camera to a pawn shop. This act of selling the camera without Lisa’s consent is a clear and serious interference with her ownership rights, constituting conversion.
How does the law treat unintentional entries onto land?
A: Unintentional entries, such as being pushed, are not considered trespass as they lack intent.
Example: During a crowded street festival, Chloe is suddenly pushed by a surge of people and inadvertently ends up on Nathan’s private lawn, which is adjacent to the public area. Since Chloe did not intend to enter Nathan’s property and was forced onto it due to the push from the crowd, her entry is not considered trespass due to the lack of intent.
Can words alone constitute assault?
A: Yes, if they amount to a threat of immediate force.
Example: In a heated argument at a cafe, Kevin leans across the table towards Alex, clenches his fists, and loudly states, “I’m going to punch you if you don’t back off right now!” Although Kevin hasn’t made any physical contact, his threatening words and aggressive posture lead Alex to fear immediate physical harm. This scenario demonstrates that words alone can constitute assault if they amount to a credible threat of immediate force.
Identify which of the following would be trespass to land:
* (A) While watering his garden, Defendant decides to spray
some water onto Claimant’s garden.
* (B) While Defendant is spraying pesticide on his shrubs, the
wind blows some of it onto Claimant’s garden.
* (C) Defendant throws a ball over Claimant’s yard to the street on the other side.
* (D) Defendant fails to cut a rotting limb from a tree that hangs over Claimant’s property and a windstorm knocks the limb onto Claimant’s garden.
C. Defendant throws a ball over Claimant’s yard to the street on the other side.
Tresspass to land is an unlawful and intentional direct interference with the claimant’s possession of land.
This is trespass because spraying the water was intentional and trespass to land need not cause harm to the claimant’s property.
WHAT ARE THREE TYPES OF TRESPASS
TO PERSON?
- Battery
- Assault
- False Imprisonment
What is unlawful force?
force that is not wanted and not consented to.
For each of the following scenarios, identify whether the defendant has committed battery, assault, or neither tort.
A: Battery
B: Assault C: Neither
1. Defendant brushes a spider off of Claimant’s shoulder.
2. While walking on a sidewalk, Defendant shoves his friend so that he bumps into Claimant, a police officer.
3. While performing a root canal on Claimant, Defendant decides to remove another tooth that does not appear healthy.
4. While holding a hose, Defendant tells Claimant that she is going to spray him.
5. Defendant comes behind Claimant and throws a rock at him, which Claimant sees after it narrowly missed him.
- Neither - Battery is the direct and intentional application of unlawful force to the Clamant’s person. Assault is an intentional act that causes the Claimant reasonably to apprehend the immediate and direct infliction of unlawful force on their person. In this scenario, there was contact, but contact that is generally acceptable in the ordinary conduct of everyday life is not unlawful.
- Battery - There was unlawful contact with both the friend and the officer; direct contact includes propelling an object or another person into the claimant.
- Battery - This scenario certainly involves contact, and even though it was intended to help the claimant, it is battery in the absence of consent.
- Assault - There is no contact (and so no battery) but Defendant’s words would make Claimant apprehend infliction of force (being hit with water); the claimant does not need to fear the force being threatened to show apprehension of force for assault.
- Neither - There is no assault because the apprehension must be of immediate force about to be applied; apprehension of a past threat of force does not suffice.
- Claimant can recover for trespass to land even without actual damage to the land.
- Grabbing a phone out of Claimant’s hand can be a battery.
- Blocking the road that Claimant is traveling on is false imprisonment.
- Consent to physical contact in a sporting event must be express.
- A conversion remedy allows Claimant to get an order for Defendant to return the goods.
- True - Trespass to land does not require actual damage to the land.
- True - For battery, the application of unlawful force to the claimant’s person may be to an object that the claimant is holding.
- False - False imprisonment requires a complete constraint of the claimant’s freedom of movement; merely blocking one direction does not suffice.
- False - Consent to physical contact in a sporting event may be implied, as long as the contact is within the bounds of the game.
- True - If the defendant who converted the claimant’s goods still has possession, the claimant can get an order for the defendant to return them.
For each of the following scenarios, identify whether the defendant has committed trespass to goods, conversion, or neither.
A: Trespass to goods B: Conversion C: Neither
- Defendant goes to a bazaar and buys jewellery; she does not know jewellery was stolen from Claimant.
- Defendant sticks his finger in a cake at Claimant’s bake shop.
- Defendant trips while running through Claimant’s china shop and shatters a vase.
- Conversion - Trespass to goods is defined as intentional and direct interference with the claimant’s possession of goods. Conversion is defined as ‘intentionally dealing with goods in a way which is seriously inconsistent with the rights of the owner’.
This is conversion because the intent required is just intent to do the act; the defendant need not have intended to infringe the claimant’s rights in the goods to be liable.
- Tress pass to goods - This scenario is trespass to goods because that would include touching the goods in a way that goes beyond what is ordinarily acceptable.
- Neither - This scenario is neither because both conversion and trespass to goods require intentional conduct. Unintentionally harming the claimant’s property does not qualify, even if negligent.
What is negligence in tort law?
Answer: Negligence in tort law is a type of liability based on fault or careless conduct by the defendant, where the intent of the defendant is usually irrelevant. The primary objective of negligence is to compensate the injured party by placing them in the position they would have been in if the tort had not occurred.
Example: During a rainy day, the owner of a grocery store, Derek, neglects to put out a “Wet Floor” sign after mopping the entrance. Sarah, unaware of the slippery condition, enters the store, slips, and injures her ankle. Derek’s failure to warn customers of the hazardous condition represents careless conduct, making him liable for negligence. The aim of any resulting legal action would be to compensate Sarah for her injury, ideally restoring her to the position she would have been in had the negligence not occurred.
What are the essential elements that must be proven in a negligence claim?
Answer: In a negligence claim, the claimant must prove that the defendant owed them a duty of care, breached that duty of care, and that the breach of duty caused the claimant’s injury. These elements must be established in this specific order for the claim to succeed.
Example: During a neighborhood block party, Tony, a homeowner, fails to repair a known loose floorboard on his deck. While attending the party, Linda steps on the loose floorboard, which gives way, causing her to fall and break her wrist. For Linda’s negligence claim to succeed against Tony, she must demonstrate that Tony owed her a duty of care to ensure his property was safe for guests, that he breached this duty by neglecting the known hazard, and that this breach directly led to her injury.
What is meant by ‘duty of care’ in negligence?
Answer: A ‘duty of care’ in negligence implies that the defendant owes a responsibility to the claimant to avoid acts or omissions that could reasonably be foreseen to harm the claimant. This duty is not owed to the world at large but is specific to certain situations or relationships, like doctor-patient or driver-pedestrian.
Example: Dr. Ellis, a general practitioner, prescribes medication to her patient, Jordan, without properly reviewing his medical history for potential allergies. Jordan has a severe allergic reaction to the medication, resulting in hospitalization. In this scenario, Dr. Ellis owed a duty of care to Jordan to ensure that any prescribed medication would not harm him, based on the specific doctor-patient relationship. Her failure to review his medical history and foresee the potential harm breached this duty.
How is a breach of duty established in negligence?
Answer: A breach of duty in negligence is established when it is shown that the defendant failed to meet the standard of care expected in their situation. The standard is usually that of a reasonable and prudent person under similar circumstances. Special rules apply to children and professionals.
Example: During a heavy snowstorm, the owner of a convenience store, Alex, decides not to salt or clear the icy sidewalk in front of his shop. Mark, a customer, slips on the ice while entering the store and suffers a broken arm. In this case, Alex breached his duty by failing to take reasonable precautions to make the entrance safe for customers, which a prudent store owner would have done under similar circumstances, leading to Mark’s injury.
What is required to prove causation in a negligence claim?
Answer: To prove causation in negligence, the claimant must demonstrate that the defendant’s breach of duty directly caused the claimant’s injury (“causation in fact”) and that the harm suffered was a foreseeable result of the defendant’s actions (“causation in law”). The ‘but-for’ test is commonly used for establishing causation in fact.
Example: Leah, an inexperienced cyclist, decides to ride her bike on a busy street without using the designated bike lane. At the same time, Dan, driving his car, is texting and not paying attention to the road. Dan swerves slightly and hits Leah, causing her to suffer injuries. To establish causation in negligence, Leah must show that “but for” Dan’s breach of duty (texting while driving), her injuries would not have occurred, establishing causation in fact. Additionally, it must be shown that Leah’s injuries were a foreseeable result of Dan’s actions, meeting the requirement for causation in law.
What is a common defense to negligence?*
Answer: A common defense to negligence is contributory negligence, where the claimant’s own fault contributed to their injury. If established, this defense does not remove liability but reduces the amount of damages proportionate to the claimant’s share of the blame.
Example: During a late-night drive, Emily speeds through a poorly lit street and hits a car driven by Jack, who had failed to signal before turning. In the resulting lawsuit, it’s determined that Emily’s speeding contributed to the accident. Although Jack was at fault for not signaling, Emily’s contributory negligence (speeding) led to a reduction in the damages she could recover, proportionate to her share of the blame in the accident.
Identify which of the following are criteria for establishing a duty of care in a novel duty situation:
(check all that apply)
O 1. Fair, just and reasonable
O 2. Balance of probabilities
O 3. Proximity
O 4. Omission to act
© 5. Foreseeability
1, 3, 5,
Criteria for determining whether a novel duty exists include foreseeability of harm to the claimant (5), proximity of relationship between the claimant and the defendant (3), and whether imposing a duty of care is fair, just and reasonable (1).
Identify which of the following are elements of magnitude of the risk in a breach of duty analysis.
(check all that apply)
O 1. Likelihood of injury
O 2. Practicability of taking precautions
O 3. Social utility of the conduct
O 4. Gravity of the likely harm
1,4
In assessing magnitude of the risk, courts consider likelihood of injury (1) and gravity of the potential harm (4). Practicability of precautions (2) and social utility (3) are on the other side of the balance.
WHAT ARE THREE REQUIREMENTS FOR RES IPSA LOQUITUR
- Cause of incident unknown
- Thing causing damage under sole control of defendant
- Type of occurrence would not happen without negligence
NEGLIGENCE RECAP
- Defendant owed claimant duty of care
- Defendant breached that duty by failing to meet required standard of care
CAUSATION IN FACT WHEN
MULTIPLE CAUSES
Defendant’s act materially contributed to harm
Defendant’s act materially contributed to harm
WHAT ARE THE ELEMENTS OF NEGLIGENCE
- Duty of Care
- Breach of Duty
- Cause of Claimant’s
Injury
CAUSATION IN FACT
Usually use but for test
Usually use but for test
Answer the question below based on the following facts:
In support of a charity fundraising luncheon, two volunteers independently brought to the event a casserole dish made with ground beef. The two dishes were kept separate, and a luncheon guest took portions from both dishes.
The guest became seriously ill with what was later determined to be a bacterial infection from negligently undercooked beef. Both dishes were found to contain the bacteria at a dangerous level.
Can the guest establish causation in fact?
O A. Yes, using the ‘but for’ test
O B. Yes, using the ‘material contribution’ test
O c. No
B.
The guest can establish causation in fact using the ‘material contribution’ test (B) because two causes acted together to cause the harm. The ‘but for’ test (A) would not work because the guest would have become ill even if one of the volunteers was not negligent. However, because the guest ate from both harmful dishes, the guest can show that each volunteer’s breach of duty materially contributed to the guest’s harm.
CAUSATION IN LAW
Remoteness of Damage
DEFENCE OF CONTRIBUTORY
NEGLIGENCE
Will reduce damage award by claimant’s share of fault
Answer the following questions True or False:
I. The duty that teachers owe to their students is an established duty of care.
fill in blank
2. A rescuer does not owe a duty of care to the person being rescued.
3. The standard of care applied to children takes into account the specific child’s intelligence and experience.
4. Res ipsa loquitur creates an inference that the defendant acted negligently.
5. A break in the chain of causation may arise through a natural event.
6. A claimant who was more at fault for the accident than the defendant cannot recover damages from the defendant.
- True - The duty of care teachers owe to students is an established duty of care.
- False - A rescuer owes a duty of care to the person being rescued not to make the situation worse.
- False - While a child’s age is taken into account in determining the standard of care, the particular child’s intelligence and experience is not taken into account.
- True - Res ipsa loquitur allows the court to infer that the defendant was in breach of duty.
- True - A break in the chain of causation may arise through an intervening act of the claimant or a third party, or an intervening natural event.
- False - A claimant’s contributory negligence, even if greater than the defendant’s, will only reduce the amount of the claimant’s recovery rather than bar it.
What are the two categories of economic loss in negligence claims?
A: Consequential economic loss (related to physical injury/property damage) and pure economic loss (unconnected to physical damage).
Example: After a contractor, John, negligently damages the water pipes while renovating Amy’s kitchen, Amy incurs additional costs for water damage repairs and replacing ruined appliances (consequential economic loss). Meanwhile, Amy’s neighbor, who shares a water supply, faces higher water bills due to the leak, despite no physical damage to their property (pure economic loss).
What must a claimant prove to recover for pure economic loss?
A: A special relationship where the defendant assumed responsibility for the claimant’s economic welfare.
Example: Max, a tax consultant, agrees to prepare and file Linda’s tax returns, assuring her of his expertise in tax law and compliance. Linda relies on Max’s assurance and entrusts him with all her financial documents. Max, however, negligently files the returns, resulting in Linda facing hefty fines and penalties from the tax authority. Here, Max assumed a special responsibility for Linda’s economic welfare, making him potentially liable for the financial losses incurred due to his negligence.
Give an example of a situation where one can claim for pure economic loss.
A: An investor suffering loss due to a negligently prepared financial report by an accountant.
What distinguishes a primary victim from a secondary victim in psychiatric harm cases?
A: Primary victims are at risk of physical injury themselves, while secondary victims witness harm to others.
What additional criteria must a secondary victim meet to claim for psychiatric harm?
A: Foreseeable harm to a person of normal fortitude, close relationship with the harmed person, presence at the event or its immediate aftermath, and direct sensory experience.
What is pure economic loss in negligence law?
A: Pure economic loss refers to financial loss not connected to physical harm or property damage. It’s recoverable only if there’s a special relationship where the defendant assumes responsibility for the claimant’s economic welfare.
Can pure economic loss be claimed in negligence without a special relationship?
A: No, pure economic loss requires a special relationship between the claimant and defendant, where the defendant has assumed responsibility for the claimant’s economic welfare.
What distinguishes a primary victim from a secondary victim in psychiatric harm cases?
A: A primary victim is endangered by the defendant’s conduct and suffers psychiatric harm, while a secondary victim suffers psychiatric harm by witnessing harm to others but is not themselves endangered.
What are the criteria for a duty of care in secondary victim psychiatric harm cases?
A: Foreseeability of psychiatric illness, close relationship with the harmed person, presence at the accident or its immediate aftermath, and direct witnessing of the events.
What common negligence principles apply to both pure economic loss and psychiatric harm?
A: Both require establishing a breach of duty by showing the defendant fell below a reasonable standard of care, and proving that the breach caused the claimant’s loss.
Two TYPES OF EcOnOMIc
Loss
Consequential economic loss
* Pure economic loss
For each of the following, identify whether the loss is pure economic loss or consequential economic loss:
A: Pure economic loss B: Consequential economic loss
- The claimant’s car is damaged by the defendant’s negligence, causing the claimant to lose fees from her ride-share business until the car is repaired.
- The claimant relies on a solicitor’s negligent analysis of a business and loses his investment when the business pure economic los fails.
- The claimant’s business has to suspend operations after the defendant negligently damages a water line leading to the plant, causing the claimant to lose profits from the suspension
What distinguishes pure economic loss from consequential economic loss in negligence claims?
Pure economic loss is economic damage not connected to physical harm or property damage, whereas consequential economic loss arises from physical injury or property damage.
How can a claimant recover for pure economic loss in tort law?
By proving a special relationship existed where the defendant assumed responsibility for the claimant’s economic welfare, typically involving reliance on the defendant’s expertise or information.
What is the difference between a primary and secondary victim in claims for psychiatric harm?
A primary victim is endangered and suffers psychiatric harm, while a secondary victim witnesses harm to others and faces stricter recovery criteria, including a close relationship with the harmed and direct witnessing.
What must be proven for a secondary victim to recover for psychiatric harm?
It must be foreseeable that a person of normal fortitude would suffer psychiatric illness, there must be a close relationship with the harmed, presence at the scene or immediate aftermath, and direct witnessing of the event.
What distinguishes pure economic loss from consequential economic loss in negligence claims?
Pure economic loss is unrelated to any physical damage and requires a special relationship for recovery, whereas consequential economic loss arises from physical injury or property damage and is recoverable under ordinary negligence rules.
Under what conditions can pure economic loss be recovered in tort law?
Pure economic loss can be recovered if there is a special relationship between the claimant and defendant, where the defendant assumes responsibility for the claimant’s economic welfare, typically through professional advice or services.
What is the primary difference between primary and secondary victims in claims for psychiatric harm?
Primary victims are those at risk of physical injury due to the defendant’s negligence, while secondary victims are bystanders who suffer psychiatric harm from witnessing harm to others, without being in personal danger.
Primary victims are those at risk of physical injury due to the defendant’s negligence, while secondary victims are bystanders who suffer psychiatric harm from witnessing harm to others, without being in personal danger.
What four conditions must be met for a secondary victim to recover for psychiatric harm?
The conditions are: (1) psychiatric illness is foreseeable to a person of normal fortitude, (2) a close and loving relationship exists with the person harmed, (3) the claimant was present at the scene or its immediate aftermath, and (4) the claimant directly witnessed the events.
Q5: How is the recovery for psychiatric harm limited in negligence law?
A5: Recovery is limited to cases where psychiatric harm is a recognized mental illness or shock-induced physical condition. Grief or fright alone is not recoverable, and special principles restrict liability, especially for secondary victims.
A: Pure economic loss B: Consequential economic loss
- The claimant’s car is damaged by the defendant’s negligence, causing the claimant to lose fees from her ride-share business until the car is repaired.
- The claimant relies on a solicitor’s negligent analysis of a business and loses his investment when the business fails.
- The claimant’s business has to suspend operations after the defendant negligently damages a water line leading to the plant, causing the claimant to lose profits from the suspension
- B
- A
- A
What are the three forms of an employer’s liability in tort law?
A: The three forms are breach of personal duty of care, breach of specific statutory duty, and vicarious liability for torts committed by an employee.
What does an employer’s duty of care to its employees entail?
A: It includes providing competent staff, safe equipment, a secure work environment, and a safe system of work, tailored to each employee’s needs considering their age, experience, and physical condition.
