Tort Law 6
G.E. van Maanen and Jaap Hage
6.1 The Domain of Tort
Donoghue-vs-Stevenson,-[1932]-AC-562
On-August-26,-1928,-Mrs.-May-Donoghue-visited-a-bar-in-Paisley,-Scotland.-The-owner-
of-the-bar-poured-part-of-a-bottle-of-ginger-beer-on-top-of-her-ice-cream;-her-friend-
poured-on-the-remainder.-On-doing-so,-they-saw-the-remains-of-a-snail-in-a-state-of-
decomposition.-Mrs.-Donoghue-later-claimed-to-have-contracted-gastro-enteritis-from-
drinking-the-bottle,-and-therefore-she-wanted-to-be-compensated-financially-by-
Stevenson,-who-had-manufactured-the-bottle.
This-case-between-Mrs.-Donoghue,-who-allegedly-suffered-damage-from-drinking-
from-a-bottle-that-contained-spoiled-ginger-beer,-and-Stevenson,-who-produced-
this-bottle,-has-become-a-classic-of-tort-law.-Tort-law-deals-with-cases-in-which-a-
victim-suffered-damage-and-wants-someone-else-to-compensate-the-damage.
Main-Principle-of-Tort-Law-At-first-sight,-it-may-seem-strange-that-if-people-
suffer-damage,-someone-else-must-compensate-them.-In-fact,-this-would-be-an-
exception-to-the-main-principle-of-tort-law:-Everyone-must-in-principle-bear-his-
own-damage.
That-everyone-bears-his-own-damage-and-that-therefore-nobody-else-must-
compensate-it-is-the-starting-point,-the-main-principle-of-tort-law.-One-might-see-
the-field-of-tort-law-as-dealing-with-the-question-when-we-must-make-exceptions-
to-this-principle.-In-this-connection,-several-questions-pop-up:
G.E.-van-Maanen
Maastricht-University,-Maastricht,-The-Netherlands
J.-Hage-(*)
Maastricht-European-Private-Law-Institute-(M-EPLI),-Maastricht-University,-
Maastricht,-The-Netherlands-e-mail:-
,102 G.E. van Maanen and J. Hage
J.-Hage-and-B.-Akkermans-(eds.),-Introduction-to-Law, 101
DOI-10.1007/978-3-319-06910-4_6,-#-Springer-International-Publishing-Switzerland-2014
1. Why-should-the-damage-that-a-victim-suffered-under-certain-circumstances-
beshifted-to-a-different-person-at-all?
2. What-are-the-conditions-under-which-a-victim’s-damage-must-be-compensated-
byanother-person?
3. If-damage-is-to-be-compensated,-which-damage-qualifies-for-compensation?
These-three-questions-will-be-answered-in-Sects.-6.2,-6.3–6.6,-and-6.7,-
respectively.-But-first,-two-preliminary-issues-need-to-be-dealt-with.
6.1.1 Contract-Law-and-Penal-Law
Tort-law-must-be-distinguished-from-both-contract-law-and-criminal-law.-Unlike-
contract-law,-tort-law-deals-with-situations-where-there-is-no-preexisting-
contractual-relationship.-If-such-a-contractual-relationship-does-exist,-
compensation-of-damage-is-usually-dealt-with-by-the-law-of-contract.
Moreover,-unlike-criminal-law,-tort-law-does-not-aim-at-punishing-wrongful-
behavior,-but-seeks-for-ways-to-compensate-the-damage-that-is-often-caused-by-
wrongful-acts.-So-tort-law-differs-from-criminal-law-in-that-it-does-not-focus-on-
punishment-but-on-the-compensation-of-damage,-and-it-differs-from-contract-law-
in-thatit-does-not-dealwith-thedamage-thatresults-fromthe-nonperformance-of-
contracts.
6.1.2 Tort-and-Torts
The-expression-“tort-law”-suggests-that-tort-law-is-a-homogeneous-field-of-law,-
with-a-few-rules-that-regulate-compensation-for-all-kinds-of-damage.-To-some-
extent,-this-
suggestioniscorrect,butnotcompletely.Tortlawcanbeappliedtoveryheterogeneous -
topics,-such-as-bodily-harm,-manslaughter,-insult,-libel,-infringement-of-privacy,-
trespass-on-one’s-property-or-into-one’s-home,-damage-to-one’s-goods,-violation-
of-
copyright,unlawfulcompetition,collapsingbuildings,unhealthyfood,andsoon.What -
all-these-situations-have-in-common-is-that-an-event-caused-damage-to-a-victim-
and-that-
theremaybereasontoletsomeoneelsecompensatethisdamage.Fortherest,however, -
there-seems-to-be-little-similarity-concerning-the-above-mentioned-situations.
Law-of-Torts-It-would-therefore-be-quite-possible-to-develop-rules-for-each-of-
them,-and-these-rules-could-be-fine-tuned-to-the-various-cases-and-the-differences-
between-them.-Actually,-this-is-what-happened-in-common-law.-It-has-developed-
rules-for-several-kinds-of-torts.-For-this-reason,-the-rules-about-the-different-
situations-were-originally-called-the-law-of-torts-(plural).
, 6 Tort Law 103
Negligence-However,-with-the-Donoghue-v.-Stevenson-case,-a-development-has-
started-in-common-law-in-which-one-particular-tort,-the-tort-of-negligence,-has-
come-to-dominate-an-important-part-of-the-field.-Negligence-as-a-tort-is-assumed-
if-someone-breached-a-legal-duty-to-take-care-towards-other-persons-and-their-
interests-and-this-breach-resulted-in-damage-to-someone-towards-whom-care-was-
due.-This-development-has-changed-the-“law-of-torts”-into-“tort-law,”-but-the-field-
of-tort-law-still-exhibits-the-traces-of-the-old-situation-in-which-there-were-
separate-rules-for-the-different-torts.
Does-this-mean-that-tort-law-in-the-common-law-tradition-is-very-different-
from-that-in-the-civil-law-tradition?-Not-really.-In-the-common-law-tradition,-there-
are,-as-a-starting-point,-different-kinds-of-torts,-but-the-doctrine-of-negligence-has-
now-created-a-tendency-to-treat-these-different-kinds-of-torts-more-similarly.
Civil-Law-In-the-civil-law-tradition,-there-are-not-as-many-kinds-of-torts-as-far-as-
legislation-is-concerned.-However,-the-application-of-the-relatively-few-rules-has-
been-differentiated-between-different-kinds-of-wrongful-acts-by-means-of-judicial-
decisions-in-which-the-relatively-uniform-tort-law-has-been-interpreted.
For-instance,-in-the-case-of-wilful-causation-of-damage-such-as-physical-mistreatment,-
liability-is-more-easily-assumed-than-in-case-of-an-accident.-The-liability-for-inherently-
dangerous-activities-tends-also-to-be-greater-than-for-events-which-cause-damage-by-
way-of-coincidence.-These-distinctions-could-not-be-found-originally-in-legislation,-but-
were-based-on-case-law.-However,-relatively-recently,-some-of-these-developments-from-
case-law-have-been-codified.-We-return-to-this-point-in-Sect.-6.7.
Since-the-relatively-uniform-rules-have-been-interpreted-differently-for-
different-kinds-of-wrongful-acts,-the-case-law-in-the-civil-law-tradition-created-a-
greater-differentiation-than-appears-to-be-the-case-on-the-basis-of-legislation-only.-
The-result-is-that-the-difference-between-the-civil-law-and-the-common-law-
tradition-is-mainly-one-of-style.
6.2 The-Functions-of-Tort-Law-and-the-Grounds-of-Tort-Liability
6.2.1 Functions-of-Tort-Law
The-rules-of-tort-law-can,-to-some-extent,-be-explained-by-the-fact-that-tort-law-
fulfills-several-functions,-which-sometimes-overlap.-These-functions-include
– the-realization-of-compensatory-justice,
– the-realization-of-a-distribution-of-damage-over-society-that-is-both-fair-
andefficient,
– the-granting-of-compensation-to-people-for-damage-caused-by-someone-else,–-
the-prevention-of-damage.
G.E. van Maanen and Jaap Hage
6.1 The Domain of Tort
Donoghue-vs-Stevenson,-[1932]-AC-562
On-August-26,-1928,-Mrs.-May-Donoghue-visited-a-bar-in-Paisley,-Scotland.-The-owner-
of-the-bar-poured-part-of-a-bottle-of-ginger-beer-on-top-of-her-ice-cream;-her-friend-
poured-on-the-remainder.-On-doing-so,-they-saw-the-remains-of-a-snail-in-a-state-of-
decomposition.-Mrs.-Donoghue-later-claimed-to-have-contracted-gastro-enteritis-from-
drinking-the-bottle,-and-therefore-she-wanted-to-be-compensated-financially-by-
Stevenson,-who-had-manufactured-the-bottle.
This-case-between-Mrs.-Donoghue,-who-allegedly-suffered-damage-from-drinking-
from-a-bottle-that-contained-spoiled-ginger-beer,-and-Stevenson,-who-produced-
this-bottle,-has-become-a-classic-of-tort-law.-Tort-law-deals-with-cases-in-which-a-
victim-suffered-damage-and-wants-someone-else-to-compensate-the-damage.
Main-Principle-of-Tort-Law-At-first-sight,-it-may-seem-strange-that-if-people-
suffer-damage,-someone-else-must-compensate-them.-In-fact,-this-would-be-an-
exception-to-the-main-principle-of-tort-law:-Everyone-must-in-principle-bear-his-
own-damage.
That-everyone-bears-his-own-damage-and-that-therefore-nobody-else-must-
compensate-it-is-the-starting-point,-the-main-principle-of-tort-law.-One-might-see-
the-field-of-tort-law-as-dealing-with-the-question-when-we-must-make-exceptions-
to-this-principle.-In-this-connection,-several-questions-pop-up:
G.E.-van-Maanen
Maastricht-University,-Maastricht,-The-Netherlands
J.-Hage-(*)
Maastricht-European-Private-Law-Institute-(M-EPLI),-Maastricht-University,-
Maastricht,-The-Netherlands-e-mail:-
,102 G.E. van Maanen and J. Hage
J.-Hage-and-B.-Akkermans-(eds.),-Introduction-to-Law, 101
DOI-10.1007/978-3-319-06910-4_6,-#-Springer-International-Publishing-Switzerland-2014
1. Why-should-the-damage-that-a-victim-suffered-under-certain-circumstances-
beshifted-to-a-different-person-at-all?
2. What-are-the-conditions-under-which-a-victim’s-damage-must-be-compensated-
byanother-person?
3. If-damage-is-to-be-compensated,-which-damage-qualifies-for-compensation?
These-three-questions-will-be-answered-in-Sects.-6.2,-6.3–6.6,-and-6.7,-
respectively.-But-first,-two-preliminary-issues-need-to-be-dealt-with.
6.1.1 Contract-Law-and-Penal-Law
Tort-law-must-be-distinguished-from-both-contract-law-and-criminal-law.-Unlike-
contract-law,-tort-law-deals-with-situations-where-there-is-no-preexisting-
contractual-relationship.-If-such-a-contractual-relationship-does-exist,-
compensation-of-damage-is-usually-dealt-with-by-the-law-of-contract.
Moreover,-unlike-criminal-law,-tort-law-does-not-aim-at-punishing-wrongful-
behavior,-but-seeks-for-ways-to-compensate-the-damage-that-is-often-caused-by-
wrongful-acts.-So-tort-law-differs-from-criminal-law-in-that-it-does-not-focus-on-
punishment-but-on-the-compensation-of-damage,-and-it-differs-from-contract-law-
in-thatit-does-not-dealwith-thedamage-thatresults-fromthe-nonperformance-of-
contracts.
6.1.2 Tort-and-Torts
The-expression-“tort-law”-suggests-that-tort-law-is-a-homogeneous-field-of-law,-
with-a-few-rules-that-regulate-compensation-for-all-kinds-of-damage.-To-some-
extent,-this-
suggestioniscorrect,butnotcompletely.Tortlawcanbeappliedtoveryheterogeneous -
topics,-such-as-bodily-harm,-manslaughter,-insult,-libel,-infringement-of-privacy,-
trespass-on-one’s-property-or-into-one’s-home,-damage-to-one’s-goods,-violation-
of-
copyright,unlawfulcompetition,collapsingbuildings,unhealthyfood,andsoon.What -
all-these-situations-have-in-common-is-that-an-event-caused-damage-to-a-victim-
and-that-
theremaybereasontoletsomeoneelsecompensatethisdamage.Fortherest,however, -
there-seems-to-be-little-similarity-concerning-the-above-mentioned-situations.
Law-of-Torts-It-would-therefore-be-quite-possible-to-develop-rules-for-each-of-
them,-and-these-rules-could-be-fine-tuned-to-the-various-cases-and-the-differences-
between-them.-Actually,-this-is-what-happened-in-common-law.-It-has-developed-
rules-for-several-kinds-of-torts.-For-this-reason,-the-rules-about-the-different-
situations-were-originally-called-the-law-of-torts-(plural).
, 6 Tort Law 103
Negligence-However,-with-the-Donoghue-v.-Stevenson-case,-a-development-has-
started-in-common-law-in-which-one-particular-tort,-the-tort-of-negligence,-has-
come-to-dominate-an-important-part-of-the-field.-Negligence-as-a-tort-is-assumed-
if-someone-breached-a-legal-duty-to-take-care-towards-other-persons-and-their-
interests-and-this-breach-resulted-in-damage-to-someone-towards-whom-care-was-
due.-This-development-has-changed-the-“law-of-torts”-into-“tort-law,”-but-the-field-
of-tort-law-still-exhibits-the-traces-of-the-old-situation-in-which-there-were-
separate-rules-for-the-different-torts.
Does-this-mean-that-tort-law-in-the-common-law-tradition-is-very-different-
from-that-in-the-civil-law-tradition?-Not-really.-In-the-common-law-tradition,-there-
are,-as-a-starting-point,-different-kinds-of-torts,-but-the-doctrine-of-negligence-has-
now-created-a-tendency-to-treat-these-different-kinds-of-torts-more-similarly.
Civil-Law-In-the-civil-law-tradition,-there-are-not-as-many-kinds-of-torts-as-far-as-
legislation-is-concerned.-However,-the-application-of-the-relatively-few-rules-has-
been-differentiated-between-different-kinds-of-wrongful-acts-by-means-of-judicial-
decisions-in-which-the-relatively-uniform-tort-law-has-been-interpreted.
For-instance,-in-the-case-of-wilful-causation-of-damage-such-as-physical-mistreatment,-
liability-is-more-easily-assumed-than-in-case-of-an-accident.-The-liability-for-inherently-
dangerous-activities-tends-also-to-be-greater-than-for-events-which-cause-damage-by-
way-of-coincidence.-These-distinctions-could-not-be-found-originally-in-legislation,-but-
were-based-on-case-law.-However,-relatively-recently,-some-of-these-developments-from-
case-law-have-been-codified.-We-return-to-this-point-in-Sect.-6.7.
Since-the-relatively-uniform-rules-have-been-interpreted-differently-for-
different-kinds-of-wrongful-acts,-the-case-law-in-the-civil-law-tradition-created-a-
greater-differentiation-than-appears-to-be-the-case-on-the-basis-of-legislation-only.-
The-result-is-that-the-difference-between-the-civil-law-and-the-common-law-
tradition-is-mainly-one-of-style.
6.2 The-Functions-of-Tort-Law-and-the-Grounds-of-Tort-Liability
6.2.1 Functions-of-Tort-Law
The-rules-of-tort-law-can,-to-some-extent,-be-explained-by-the-fact-that-tort-law-
fulfills-several-functions,-which-sometimes-overlap.-These-functions-include
– the-realization-of-compensatory-justice,
– the-realization-of-a-distribution-of-damage-over-society-that-is-both-fair-
andefficient,
– the-granting-of-compensation-to-people-for-damage-caused-by-someone-else,–-
the-prevention-of-damage.
