Notes created using ULaw materials for the purpose of assisting existing ULaw GDL students in ULaw GDL exams only. They are
intended to be used as a supplemental tool to aid revision in conjunction with ULaw materials, not as a replacement for them.
GENERAL ADVICE
Identify C and D
Identify nature of harm suffered
Consider which torts may be relevant
DEFINE torts
Apply the elements of that tort
Consider defences
Conclude on liability
Consider remedies
How are damages assessed
Preliminaries:
Use clear headings eg X v Y
Deal with each cause of action separately
State the general picture eg X can consider suing Y in the tort of [ ] for [type of harm]
Define the tort
Do not speculate/invent facts
If there are gaps in the facts, say if this…then…, but if not…then… - to show you are aware of the law
• Where a child is the C, he will sue through a litigation friend
• Where a child is the D he will defend through a litigation friend in principle a minor can be a D but it is
unlikely that he would be worth suing as he would not have funds to pay the damages.
Type of harm Legal redress Relevant tort
Intentional physical injury Yes Battery
Intentional physical conduct causing no physical injury Yes Battery → actionable per se
Intentionally created fear of physical injury Yes Assault → actionable per se
Accidental physical injury Yes Negligence
Accidental psychiatric injury Yes Negligence
Grief caused by death of friend No Normal grief not protected
Anger at a delay caused by a road accident No Anger not protected
Damage to reputation Yes Defamation
Invasion of privacy No Privacy is not directly protected
Annoyance caused by neighbours Yes Private nuisance
Damage to property Yes Negligence; Private nuisance;
Trespass to land
Financial loss Yes Negligence; Defamation
, TORT OF TRESPASS TO THE PERSON
STEP 1: state – C may sue D in the tort of trespass to the person for [insert conduct]
Name C and D
Identify the nature of the harm suffered → be specific about how caused
Both assault and battery are actionable per se, so there is no need to prove physical harm
STEP 2: define the relevant tort – assault or battery
ASSAULT =
Intentional act by D
Causing C to reasonably apprehend
The immediate and direct infliction of unlawful force (battery) on his/her person
• Intentional act
o Intentional conduct is essential, if not, relevant tort is negligence: Letang v Cooper
o WORDS, as well as actions, may constitute an assault: R v Ireland
o BUT conditional threats negate an assault: Tuberville v Savage
o D must intend C to reasonably apprehend the immediate infliction of unlawful force: Bici v MoD
o The threat does not need to be carried out
• Immediate = within a minute or so: Ireland
BATTERY = if there is battery there will be assault too eg the moment before the battery
Intentional application
Of unlawful force to another person
Which Is direct and immediate
• Intentional = D must intend only his actions, not the consequences: Wilson v Pringle
• Direct = force must flow almost immediately and without intervention from D’s actions
• Application of force =
o Physical contact not necessary
o Can be through a medium if it is controlled by D and the force flows from its use without intervention
• Unlawful force = physical contact which is generally acceptable in the ordinary contact of everyday life is
not unlawful: W Berkshire Health Authority
If no assault/battery, look at → WILKINSON V DOWNTON = intentional psychiatric harm
D played joke telling C her husband was severely injured → C suffered trauma/shock ie no assault or battery
→ Established a separate tort, in cases where D intends to cause shock to C, leading to tangible damage
Need all 3 of the following elements: Rhodes v OPO
Conduct element Words or conduct directed at C for which there was no justification/excuse
Mental element Intention to cause at least severe mental/emotional distress
Consequence element Physical harm/recognised psychiatric illness: Wainwright → not actionable per se
intended to be used as a supplemental tool to aid revision in conjunction with ULaw materials, not as a replacement for them.
GENERAL ADVICE
Identify C and D
Identify nature of harm suffered
Consider which torts may be relevant
DEFINE torts
Apply the elements of that tort
Consider defences
Conclude on liability
Consider remedies
How are damages assessed
Preliminaries:
Use clear headings eg X v Y
Deal with each cause of action separately
State the general picture eg X can consider suing Y in the tort of [ ] for [type of harm]
Define the tort
Do not speculate/invent facts
If there are gaps in the facts, say if this…then…, but if not…then… - to show you are aware of the law
• Where a child is the C, he will sue through a litigation friend
• Where a child is the D he will defend through a litigation friend in principle a minor can be a D but it is
unlikely that he would be worth suing as he would not have funds to pay the damages.
Type of harm Legal redress Relevant tort
Intentional physical injury Yes Battery
Intentional physical conduct causing no physical injury Yes Battery → actionable per se
Intentionally created fear of physical injury Yes Assault → actionable per se
Accidental physical injury Yes Negligence
Accidental psychiatric injury Yes Negligence
Grief caused by death of friend No Normal grief not protected
Anger at a delay caused by a road accident No Anger not protected
Damage to reputation Yes Defamation
Invasion of privacy No Privacy is not directly protected
Annoyance caused by neighbours Yes Private nuisance
Damage to property Yes Negligence; Private nuisance;
Trespass to land
Financial loss Yes Negligence; Defamation
, TORT OF TRESPASS TO THE PERSON
STEP 1: state – C may sue D in the tort of trespass to the person for [insert conduct]
Name C and D
Identify the nature of the harm suffered → be specific about how caused
Both assault and battery are actionable per se, so there is no need to prove physical harm
STEP 2: define the relevant tort – assault or battery
ASSAULT =
Intentional act by D
Causing C to reasonably apprehend
The immediate and direct infliction of unlawful force (battery) on his/her person
• Intentional act
o Intentional conduct is essential, if not, relevant tort is negligence: Letang v Cooper
o WORDS, as well as actions, may constitute an assault: R v Ireland
o BUT conditional threats negate an assault: Tuberville v Savage
o D must intend C to reasonably apprehend the immediate infliction of unlawful force: Bici v MoD
o The threat does not need to be carried out
• Immediate = within a minute or so: Ireland
BATTERY = if there is battery there will be assault too eg the moment before the battery
Intentional application
Of unlawful force to another person
Which Is direct and immediate
• Intentional = D must intend only his actions, not the consequences: Wilson v Pringle
• Direct = force must flow almost immediately and without intervention from D’s actions
• Application of force =
o Physical contact not necessary
o Can be through a medium if it is controlled by D and the force flows from its use without intervention
• Unlawful force = physical contact which is generally acceptable in the ordinary contact of everyday life is
not unlawful: W Berkshire Health Authority
If no assault/battery, look at → WILKINSON V DOWNTON = intentional psychiatric harm
D played joke telling C her husband was severely injured → C suffered trauma/shock ie no assault or battery
→ Established a separate tort, in cases where D intends to cause shock to C, leading to tangible damage
Need all 3 of the following elements: Rhodes v OPO
Conduct element Words or conduct directed at C for which there was no justification/excuse
Mental element Intention to cause at least severe mental/emotional distress
Consequence element Physical harm/recognised psychiatric illness: Wainwright → not actionable per se
