Tort Law
• Tort law belongs to the law of obligations. A tort is a civil wrong.
• Liability arises when a duty fixed by law has been breached.
• An act is tortious when the defendant has committed a specific tort.
• Contractual liability governs a breach of an agreement between the parties whereas in tort the
legal duties are imposed by law instead of being accepted voluntarily.
• Tort exists to give a personal remedy to individuals for any wrong they have suffered. Whereas,
in criminal law, it is concerned with protection of the public at large and will punish offenders.
• Tort is a civil of action and if it goes to trial (duruşma), it is referred as “bring an action” or “to
sue”. The burden of proof generally falls on the claimant, the proof is “on the balance of
probabilities”.
• A defendant in a tort case is called “tortfeasor”. More than one person = joint and several liability
• Vicarious liability is a situation where an employer is held liable for the torts of an employee
committed in the course of employment. In US, this is called as “respondeat superior”. Vicarious
liability does not apply to independent contractors.
INTENTIONAL TORTS
• Claimant would bring a “trespass” against the defendant.
There are three different forms of intentional torts:
1- Battery: the defendant performs an act intending to interfere with that person, even if there is
no intention to injure that person. Physical contact is required but actual physical harm does not
need to result.
2- Assault: a defendant causes the claimant to fear that he/she is going to commit a battery against
him.
3- False imprisonment: the defendant intentionally and directly places a total restraint on the liberty
of the claimant. For example, intentionally locking up someone in the toilet.
All tangible property not classified as real property such as goods, money is called as “CHATTELS”.
Goods = all forms of personal property
Intellectual property rights such as patents and copyrights = form of personal property “incorporeal
chattels”
Trespass to chattels = protect both chattels and land
Tort of conversion = protects only chattels
Tort of trespass to land = protect the claimants rights of peaceful possession of land and is typically
committed when a person intentionally enters the claimants land without permission.
DEFENSES TOP INTENTIONAL TORT
• Consent: explicit or implied permission
• Inevitable accident: e.g when a person comes onto the claimants property as a result of a car
accident
, • Defense of the person
• Defense of property
• Necessity (e.g. giving medicine to an unconscious person)
• Lawful arrest, search, and seizure
NEGLIGENCE
• Refers to a breach of duty of care owed by one party to another.
For a claim of negligence to be successful, three requirements should be satisfied.
1- There must be a duty of care recognized by law, from either common law or statue.
2- There must be a breach of duty of care
3- There must be a damaging result, not too remote
Neighbor principle of reasonable foreseeability – factors established if there is duty of care
A duty of care is owed if the neighbor principle applies. Neighbor is defined as “directly affected by my act
that I ought to have him in contemplation as being affected”.
Proximity – a close relationship between the defendant and the claimant (e.g. it is used to assess whether
the nervous shock was reasonably foreseeable)
Fair, just, and reasonable
Economic loss (or pecuniary) that results from negligent misstatements or negligent act will not
necessarily lead to liability of the defendant.
Quasi-contract setting: a formal setting where the relationship is like the contractual one (e.g. the
defendant in giving professional advice based on expertise)
English law states that a duty of care may be owed because of voluntary assumption of duty. Firms can
use a disclaimer to make clear that they do not voluntarily assume a duty of care.
Statutory (kanuna dayanan) duty of care = strict liability (means liability even without fault)
If the defendant owes the claimant a duty of care, the claimant must show that the duty is breached by
the defendant. The standard objective test is reasonableness, whether the defendant acted as a
reasonable person.
If the defendant is in the breach of duty of care, the claimant must prove causation and remoteness of
damages. The claimant should prove that the injury was not too remote. Peculiarities (ayrıcalık) that make
the extent of the claimant’s injuries worse than could have been expected do not usually lessen (azaltmak)
the responsibility of the defendant. This is referred as “thin skull rule”. An injury may look too remote if
an unforeseen intervening act breaks the chain of causation. Such an intervening act is called “novus actus
intervveniens”.
The defendant could base his defense on contributory negligence, meaning that the claimant himself is
also at the fault for his injury. In USA, comparative negligence exists meaning that the negligence of the
plaintiff (davacı) is compared to that of the defendant. This defense is referred as “assumption of risk”.
• Tort law belongs to the law of obligations. A tort is a civil wrong.
• Liability arises when a duty fixed by law has been breached.
• An act is tortious when the defendant has committed a specific tort.
• Contractual liability governs a breach of an agreement between the parties whereas in tort the
legal duties are imposed by law instead of being accepted voluntarily.
• Tort exists to give a personal remedy to individuals for any wrong they have suffered. Whereas,
in criminal law, it is concerned with protection of the public at large and will punish offenders.
• Tort is a civil of action and if it goes to trial (duruşma), it is referred as “bring an action” or “to
sue”. The burden of proof generally falls on the claimant, the proof is “on the balance of
probabilities”.
• A defendant in a tort case is called “tortfeasor”. More than one person = joint and several liability
• Vicarious liability is a situation where an employer is held liable for the torts of an employee
committed in the course of employment. In US, this is called as “respondeat superior”. Vicarious
liability does not apply to independent contractors.
INTENTIONAL TORTS
• Claimant would bring a “trespass” against the defendant.
There are three different forms of intentional torts:
1- Battery: the defendant performs an act intending to interfere with that person, even if there is
no intention to injure that person. Physical contact is required but actual physical harm does not
need to result.
2- Assault: a defendant causes the claimant to fear that he/she is going to commit a battery against
him.
3- False imprisonment: the defendant intentionally and directly places a total restraint on the liberty
of the claimant. For example, intentionally locking up someone in the toilet.
All tangible property not classified as real property such as goods, money is called as “CHATTELS”.
Goods = all forms of personal property
Intellectual property rights such as patents and copyrights = form of personal property “incorporeal
chattels”
Trespass to chattels = protect both chattels and land
Tort of conversion = protects only chattels
Tort of trespass to land = protect the claimants rights of peaceful possession of land and is typically
committed when a person intentionally enters the claimants land without permission.
DEFENSES TOP INTENTIONAL TORT
• Consent: explicit or implied permission
• Inevitable accident: e.g when a person comes onto the claimants property as a result of a car
accident
, • Defense of the person
• Defense of property
• Necessity (e.g. giving medicine to an unconscious person)
• Lawful arrest, search, and seizure
NEGLIGENCE
• Refers to a breach of duty of care owed by one party to another.
For a claim of negligence to be successful, three requirements should be satisfied.
1- There must be a duty of care recognized by law, from either common law or statue.
2- There must be a breach of duty of care
3- There must be a damaging result, not too remote
Neighbor principle of reasonable foreseeability – factors established if there is duty of care
A duty of care is owed if the neighbor principle applies. Neighbor is defined as “directly affected by my act
that I ought to have him in contemplation as being affected”.
Proximity – a close relationship between the defendant and the claimant (e.g. it is used to assess whether
the nervous shock was reasonably foreseeable)
Fair, just, and reasonable
Economic loss (or pecuniary) that results from negligent misstatements or negligent act will not
necessarily lead to liability of the defendant.
Quasi-contract setting: a formal setting where the relationship is like the contractual one (e.g. the
defendant in giving professional advice based on expertise)
English law states that a duty of care may be owed because of voluntary assumption of duty. Firms can
use a disclaimer to make clear that they do not voluntarily assume a duty of care.
Statutory (kanuna dayanan) duty of care = strict liability (means liability even without fault)
If the defendant owes the claimant a duty of care, the claimant must show that the duty is breached by
the defendant. The standard objective test is reasonableness, whether the defendant acted as a
reasonable person.
If the defendant is in the breach of duty of care, the claimant must prove causation and remoteness of
damages. The claimant should prove that the injury was not too remote. Peculiarities (ayrıcalık) that make
the extent of the claimant’s injuries worse than could have been expected do not usually lessen (azaltmak)
the responsibility of the defendant. This is referred as “thin skull rule”. An injury may look too remote if
an unforeseen intervening act breaks the chain of causation. Such an intervening act is called “novus actus
intervveniens”.
The defendant could base his defense on contributory negligence, meaning that the claimant himself is
also at the fault for his injury. In USA, comparative negligence exists meaning that the negligence of the
plaintiff (davacı) is compared to that of the defendant. This defense is referred as “assumption of risk”.
