TORT LAW
1 – Introduction + Duty + Breach
Tort c1 s1-6 & Horsey&Rackley c1
What is Tort?
Historically tort law developed as a means of regulating & balancing the interests of people who often lived in
close proximity in rural society
- law was focused on protecting an individual’s right to property & on allowing a citizen to protect their own
personal integrity from deliberate interference from others
- after industrialism this shifted towards providing compensation for injuries often caused by carelessness in
an increasingly mechanised society
➔ provides the main way for victims of ‘wrongs’ to achieve redress
No problem suing parents!
- money comes from parents’ insurance not bank accounts!
‘tort’ = ‘wrong’
A tort involves the infringement of a legal right/breach of legal duty, giving rise to a claim in the civil courts
- tort law = a collection of civil wrongs for which the law provides a remedy
Boundaries between torts are fluid & popularity can change:
- old torts can die out – e.g. the rule in Rylands v Fletcher [1868]
- new ones emerge – e.g. tort of misuse of private information in Vidal-Hall v Google Inc [2014]
Terms:
- a tortfeasor commits a tort & their liability is described as tortious
- a claimant (prev. 1999 plaintiff) brings a case against a defendant
People use the law of tort to seek some remedy for the wrong they have suffered.
There are significant differences between criminal and tortious liability (despite certain situations resulting in
both arising):
TORT CRIMINAL
tort claims are brought by injured person seeking a criminal actions are usually brought by public official
remedy (usually damages) (e.g. CPS) rather than victim
main function is compensation of victim main function is punishment of offender
dealt with by civil courts (county court or High dealt with by criminal courts (magistrates’ court or
Court) Crown Court)
Tort can also overlap with contract law:
TORT CONTRACT
both civil claims brought in County Court or High Court
claimants will usually seek damages
main function is to compensate claimant for loss suffered due to defendant wrongdoing
liability does not depend on any party consensus – obligations fixed by contract terms – sometimes
determined by rules dictating whether defendant implied by law, but usually expressly agreed
wrongdoing constitutes a tort
much wider scope of liability – obligations imposed need contractual relationship before claim for breach
by law, owed to world at large of contract – only parties can sue
obligations imposed by law obligations voluntarily undertaken
aim of damages is to put claimant into position aim of damages is to put claimant into position would
would have been in had the tort not been have been in had the contract been properly
committed performed
, TORT LAW
1 – Introduction + Duty + Breach
Tort c1 s1-6 & Horsey&Rackley c1
Sometimes a claimant had potential claims in both contract and tort – the law of tort can impose obligations
concurrently to any arising in contract
Range & Scope of Tort Law
Different types of harm:
The claimant must show the loss/injury they have suffered is a type of harm recognised by the existing law of
tort, or otherwise persuade the courts to extend the law to protect them
- physical injury, death, psychiatric injury, damage to property, financial loss etc
- doesn’t have to be tangible harm; some torts are ‘actionable per se’ – do not require any actual
injury/damage, only infringement of a legal right protected by the law of tort
Needs to be covered by existing tort!
- e.g. Bradford Corporation v Pickles [1895] – despite clear evidence drainage work was attempt by Pickles to
force Bradford Corporation to pay to desist, House of Lord refused to grant injunction
o not caused any harm protected by tort – improper motive irrelevant!
Tortious liability may be limited where thought to be undesirable for policy reasons
- in some cases of negligently caused harm, courts have declined to find that the defendant owed the
claimant a duty to take care – if no duty is owed, claimant has no remedy
o e.g. when using negligence to pursue claims against public bodies such as police
Tort Law & Human Rights Act 1998
Many of the rights established by the ECHR have been given effect in English law by the Human Rights Act 1998
including:
- the right to life; ECHR, Article 2
- the right to liberty; ECHR, Article 5
- the right to a fair trial; ECHR, Article 6
- the right to respect for private and family life; ECHR, Article 8
- the right to freedom of expression; ECHR, Article 10
s.6 HRA 1998 – it is unlawful for a public authority to act in a way which is incompatible with a Convention right.
- s.7 – allows a victim of such breach to bring proceedings against the public authority
- s.8 – gives the court power to award remedy for such breach – may include an award of damages provided
the court is satisfied a payment of damages is necessary to afford just satisfaction to the victim – s.8(3)
HRA 1998 may provide a direct alternative to a claim in tort where the defendant is a public body
HRA 1998 may also indirectly influence the development of tort law – as courts are themselves public
authorities, it can be argued s.6 means that courts must ensure their judgements are compatible with
Convention rights, even in cases concerning only private individuals
Potential ways HRA 1998 impacts tort:
1. ‘inspired law change’ in some areas – particularly re: privacy
2. not extended existing causes of action to reflect Convention rights – seen in both negligence and nuisance
3. largely left to judicial discretion to determine impact on individual cases
defamation, privacy & human rights – question of how to balance conflicting rights:
- defamation protects a claimant’s right to their reputation (Article 8), but may limit the defendant’s freedom
of speech (Article 10)
1 – Introduction + Duty + Breach
Tort c1 s1-6 & Horsey&Rackley c1
What is Tort?
Historically tort law developed as a means of regulating & balancing the interests of people who often lived in
close proximity in rural society
- law was focused on protecting an individual’s right to property & on allowing a citizen to protect their own
personal integrity from deliberate interference from others
- after industrialism this shifted towards providing compensation for injuries often caused by carelessness in
an increasingly mechanised society
➔ provides the main way for victims of ‘wrongs’ to achieve redress
No problem suing parents!
- money comes from parents’ insurance not bank accounts!
‘tort’ = ‘wrong’
A tort involves the infringement of a legal right/breach of legal duty, giving rise to a claim in the civil courts
- tort law = a collection of civil wrongs for which the law provides a remedy
Boundaries between torts are fluid & popularity can change:
- old torts can die out – e.g. the rule in Rylands v Fletcher [1868]
- new ones emerge – e.g. tort of misuse of private information in Vidal-Hall v Google Inc [2014]
Terms:
- a tortfeasor commits a tort & their liability is described as tortious
- a claimant (prev. 1999 plaintiff) brings a case against a defendant
People use the law of tort to seek some remedy for the wrong they have suffered.
There are significant differences between criminal and tortious liability (despite certain situations resulting in
both arising):
TORT CRIMINAL
tort claims are brought by injured person seeking a criminal actions are usually brought by public official
remedy (usually damages) (e.g. CPS) rather than victim
main function is compensation of victim main function is punishment of offender
dealt with by civil courts (county court or High dealt with by criminal courts (magistrates’ court or
Court) Crown Court)
Tort can also overlap with contract law:
TORT CONTRACT
both civil claims brought in County Court or High Court
claimants will usually seek damages
main function is to compensate claimant for loss suffered due to defendant wrongdoing
liability does not depend on any party consensus – obligations fixed by contract terms – sometimes
determined by rules dictating whether defendant implied by law, but usually expressly agreed
wrongdoing constitutes a tort
much wider scope of liability – obligations imposed need contractual relationship before claim for breach
by law, owed to world at large of contract – only parties can sue
obligations imposed by law obligations voluntarily undertaken
aim of damages is to put claimant into position aim of damages is to put claimant into position would
would have been in had the tort not been have been in had the contract been properly
committed performed
, TORT LAW
1 – Introduction + Duty + Breach
Tort c1 s1-6 & Horsey&Rackley c1
Sometimes a claimant had potential claims in both contract and tort – the law of tort can impose obligations
concurrently to any arising in contract
Range & Scope of Tort Law
Different types of harm:
The claimant must show the loss/injury they have suffered is a type of harm recognised by the existing law of
tort, or otherwise persuade the courts to extend the law to protect them
- physical injury, death, psychiatric injury, damage to property, financial loss etc
- doesn’t have to be tangible harm; some torts are ‘actionable per se’ – do not require any actual
injury/damage, only infringement of a legal right protected by the law of tort
Needs to be covered by existing tort!
- e.g. Bradford Corporation v Pickles [1895] – despite clear evidence drainage work was attempt by Pickles to
force Bradford Corporation to pay to desist, House of Lord refused to grant injunction
o not caused any harm protected by tort – improper motive irrelevant!
Tortious liability may be limited where thought to be undesirable for policy reasons
- in some cases of negligently caused harm, courts have declined to find that the defendant owed the
claimant a duty to take care – if no duty is owed, claimant has no remedy
o e.g. when using negligence to pursue claims against public bodies such as police
Tort Law & Human Rights Act 1998
Many of the rights established by the ECHR have been given effect in English law by the Human Rights Act 1998
including:
- the right to life; ECHR, Article 2
- the right to liberty; ECHR, Article 5
- the right to a fair trial; ECHR, Article 6
- the right to respect for private and family life; ECHR, Article 8
- the right to freedom of expression; ECHR, Article 10
s.6 HRA 1998 – it is unlawful for a public authority to act in a way which is incompatible with a Convention right.
- s.7 – allows a victim of such breach to bring proceedings against the public authority
- s.8 – gives the court power to award remedy for such breach – may include an award of damages provided
the court is satisfied a payment of damages is necessary to afford just satisfaction to the victim – s.8(3)
HRA 1998 may provide a direct alternative to a claim in tort where the defendant is a public body
HRA 1998 may also indirectly influence the development of tort law – as courts are themselves public
authorities, it can be argued s.6 means that courts must ensure their judgements are compatible with
Convention rights, even in cases concerning only private individuals
Potential ways HRA 1998 impacts tort:
1. ‘inspired law change’ in some areas – particularly re: privacy
2. not extended existing causes of action to reflect Convention rights – seen in both negligence and nuisance
3. largely left to judicial discretion to determine impact on individual cases
defamation, privacy & human rights – question of how to balance conflicting rights:
- defamation protects a claimant’s right to their reputation (Article 8), but may limit the defendant’s freedom
of speech (Article 10)
