TORT LAW and IT’s CASES
Contents
Lecture 1...................................................................................................................................................................2
Lecture 2...................................................................................................................................................................6
Lecture 3.................................................................................................................................................................11
Lecture 4.................................................................................................................................................................16
Lecture 5.................................................................................................................................................................22
Lecture 6.................................................................................................................................................................31
Lecture 7.................................................................................................................................................................42
Case law..................................................................................................................................................................49
1
,Lecture 1
Elemental comparative law
Methods
Compare two different legal traditions by selecting and comparing data points
Method in this course:
Compare representative forms of sources
In this course, we are not comparing actual sources, but rather representations of those
sources, i.e. representative cases rather than the case law from a
particular jurisdiction and the Draft Common Frame of Reference rather than codes from
specific European countries
Compare legal reasoning methods
Compare the functional purpose of tort law in society
Comparative view – form of legal source
Common Law
Principle extracted from case law
Rules are decided and applied based on the relevant facts.
Common law principle: A court should follow the decisions of prior courts that have ruled on
similar cases to produce a predictable outcome. A court that hears a case that presents a new
problem or “case of first impression” has the obligation to find the appropriate legal rule. This
case then becomes precedent. A precedent can be either binding or persuasive. A decision
from a superior court or from the same court on the same set of facts is binding precedent
under the doctrine of stare decisis. Decisions from other jurisdictions or parallel courts are
persuasive. Established principles should not be disturbed.
In most common law jurisdictions, there are three sources of law:
Case law (binding precedent) o Statutory law
o Regulatory law
2
,All three have equal importance
Civil Law
Statutory law: e.g. Civil Codes (e.g. French Civil Code (Code Napoléon, 1804); German Civil
Code (Bürgerliches Gesetzbuch, 1900); Italian Civil Code (Codice Civile Italiano, 1942))
Rules are laid down by the legislator
Usually general rules that allow national courts to further develop this area of law
Systematic approach
Academic writings are very important in the development of the law (private law)
E.g. BGB (Germany Civil Code) is also known as Professorenrecht (law made by professors)
– national courts very often discuss the opinions of legal authors in their decisions
Case law role than Common Law
But remember: case law has developed this area of law because the legislator has not drafted
specific rules to cover each aspects of everyday life
Comparative view – legal reasoning methods
Common Law
The rule is extracted from a case in your jurisdiction where a court has decided the matter
based on the same or similar facts.
Lawyers find a case with identical facts (at least similar) and extract a rule of law from the
holding in that case. The lawyers then argue that that prior decision is binding on the current
case because of stare decisis or, in the event it is not binding, it is persuasive. The entire
argument is based on the similarity of facts between the two cases. Lawyers on the other side
of the case may argue that the principle of law does not apply because the facts are different
or because the case is from a different court system that treats the issue differently. This is
called “distinguishing the case.”
Civil Law
European Code-based legal systems (DCFR)
Deductive method of legal reasoning: from general to particular
Lawyers start by analysing the legal rule and then they apply it to the facts of the specific case
at issue
Comparative view – functional purpose of Tort
Common Law
Corrective Justice (ex post)
Making the injured party whole
Deterrence of Future Wrongdoing (ex ante)
Corrective action for the benefit of the entire society
3
, Corrective private action in place of governmental action o Requires an open, accessible court
system
Civil Law
Reparation (ex post)
“The purpose of tort law is to restore as exactly as possible the status quo that was disturbed
by the harm and to restore the victim to the situation in which he would have been if the
wrongful act had not occurred”
e.g. in kind or through monetary compensation
Recognition (ex post)
“Recognition that the victim has suffered a wrong or that his/her right has been infringed”
e.g. nominal damages or a court’s decision that someone’s right is infringed
Prevention (ex ante) – see DCFR Art. 1:102
Be careful: distinction between prevention, punishment and deterrence
DCFR: no punitive damages – not consistent with the principle of reparation
European code based legal systems: punitive damages are awarded especially in cases of
violation of a person’s personality right (e.g. privacy) – BGH and Caroline of Monaco
Vocabulary and terms of art
Tort Synonym: non-contractual liability
Damage Any type of detrimental effect
Injury
Damages can also be synonymous with reparations or compensation
Legally relevant damage
(DCFR) Losses (economic and non-economic nature) and injury
Legal consequences of a (legally relevant) damage that has already
Reparation/Remedy occurred
Compensation Monetary reparation
Grounds of accountability Intention, negligence and accountability without intention nor
(DCFR) negligence
(strict liability)
Plaintiff = claimant = victim = injured part
Defendant = tortfeasor
Prima facie- if true, the facts alleged will allow recovery.
Dismissal – do the facts of the claim state a claim if true?
Summary judgment – does the evidence support the claim?
Directed verdict – did the plaintiff prove his or her case at trial
The Quest for a European Ius Commune – Tort Law
4
Contents
Lecture 1...................................................................................................................................................................2
Lecture 2...................................................................................................................................................................6
Lecture 3.................................................................................................................................................................11
Lecture 4.................................................................................................................................................................16
Lecture 5.................................................................................................................................................................22
Lecture 6.................................................................................................................................................................31
Lecture 7.................................................................................................................................................................42
Case law..................................................................................................................................................................49
1
,Lecture 1
Elemental comparative law
Methods
Compare two different legal traditions by selecting and comparing data points
Method in this course:
Compare representative forms of sources
In this course, we are not comparing actual sources, but rather representations of those
sources, i.e. representative cases rather than the case law from a
particular jurisdiction and the Draft Common Frame of Reference rather than codes from
specific European countries
Compare legal reasoning methods
Compare the functional purpose of tort law in society
Comparative view – form of legal source
Common Law
Principle extracted from case law
Rules are decided and applied based on the relevant facts.
Common law principle: A court should follow the decisions of prior courts that have ruled on
similar cases to produce a predictable outcome. A court that hears a case that presents a new
problem or “case of first impression” has the obligation to find the appropriate legal rule. This
case then becomes precedent. A precedent can be either binding or persuasive. A decision
from a superior court or from the same court on the same set of facts is binding precedent
under the doctrine of stare decisis. Decisions from other jurisdictions or parallel courts are
persuasive. Established principles should not be disturbed.
In most common law jurisdictions, there are three sources of law:
Case law (binding precedent) o Statutory law
o Regulatory law
2
,All three have equal importance
Civil Law
Statutory law: e.g. Civil Codes (e.g. French Civil Code (Code Napoléon, 1804); German Civil
Code (Bürgerliches Gesetzbuch, 1900); Italian Civil Code (Codice Civile Italiano, 1942))
Rules are laid down by the legislator
Usually general rules that allow national courts to further develop this area of law
Systematic approach
Academic writings are very important in the development of the law (private law)
E.g. BGB (Germany Civil Code) is also known as Professorenrecht (law made by professors)
– national courts very often discuss the opinions of legal authors in their decisions
Case law role than Common Law
But remember: case law has developed this area of law because the legislator has not drafted
specific rules to cover each aspects of everyday life
Comparative view – legal reasoning methods
Common Law
The rule is extracted from a case in your jurisdiction where a court has decided the matter
based on the same or similar facts.
Lawyers find a case with identical facts (at least similar) and extract a rule of law from the
holding in that case. The lawyers then argue that that prior decision is binding on the current
case because of stare decisis or, in the event it is not binding, it is persuasive. The entire
argument is based on the similarity of facts between the two cases. Lawyers on the other side
of the case may argue that the principle of law does not apply because the facts are different
or because the case is from a different court system that treats the issue differently. This is
called “distinguishing the case.”
Civil Law
European Code-based legal systems (DCFR)
Deductive method of legal reasoning: from general to particular
Lawyers start by analysing the legal rule and then they apply it to the facts of the specific case
at issue
Comparative view – functional purpose of Tort
Common Law
Corrective Justice (ex post)
Making the injured party whole
Deterrence of Future Wrongdoing (ex ante)
Corrective action for the benefit of the entire society
3
, Corrective private action in place of governmental action o Requires an open, accessible court
system
Civil Law
Reparation (ex post)
“The purpose of tort law is to restore as exactly as possible the status quo that was disturbed
by the harm and to restore the victim to the situation in which he would have been if the
wrongful act had not occurred”
e.g. in kind or through monetary compensation
Recognition (ex post)
“Recognition that the victim has suffered a wrong or that his/her right has been infringed”
e.g. nominal damages or a court’s decision that someone’s right is infringed
Prevention (ex ante) – see DCFR Art. 1:102
Be careful: distinction between prevention, punishment and deterrence
DCFR: no punitive damages – not consistent with the principle of reparation
European code based legal systems: punitive damages are awarded especially in cases of
violation of a person’s personality right (e.g. privacy) – BGH and Caroline of Monaco
Vocabulary and terms of art
Tort Synonym: non-contractual liability
Damage Any type of detrimental effect
Injury
Damages can also be synonymous with reparations or compensation
Legally relevant damage
(DCFR) Losses (economic and non-economic nature) and injury
Legal consequences of a (legally relevant) damage that has already
Reparation/Remedy occurred
Compensation Monetary reparation
Grounds of accountability Intention, negligence and accountability without intention nor
(DCFR) negligence
(strict liability)
Plaintiff = claimant = victim = injured part
Defendant = tortfeasor
Prima facie- if true, the facts alleged will allow recovery.
Dismissal – do the facts of the claim state a claim if true?
Summary judgment – does the evidence support the claim?
Directed verdict – did the plaintiff prove his or her case at trial
The Quest for a European Ius Commune – Tort Law
4
