tort-law

All about English tort law

A tort is a civil or common law that implies wrongdoing which is done by one party to another. As a counterpart of wrongdoing, the injured person might go for civil proceedings against the other party. For instance, let us suppose that you are passing through a grocery store and suddenly you slip on a banana that had fallen from one of the shelves. You have every right to file a civil case on behalf of the tort of negligence. As you are filing a case over grocery story, you are considered as plaintiff and grocery store is treated as a defendant or the negligent party.

To put it in easy words, as a plaintiff you are probably going to take civil actions against grocery store to provide reimbursement for suffering, pain, expenses and medical bills which incurred due to the fall.

Negligence is just one category of tort law, there are two more categories of tort law which we are going to discuss further in the blog. Meanwhile, the student can look for Assignment help UK portal, that offers all the sorts of case studies, reports based on English Tort law.

Origin of Tort

The origin of tort law is dated back to the 10th century when Roman law erupted throughout western Continental of Europe. English tort law is derived from following Roman law based on a closed system of nominate torts. In contrast to the European legal system, which has since adopted many open policies of tort liability. There are mainly three types of tort law which are:

  • Strict liability Tort
  • Intentional Tort
  • Negligence Tort

However, the tort of negligence has increased its importance over other categories of tort law. Negligence tort provides a broad scope of protection and liabilities especially since the famous case of Stevenson vs Donoghue. For security and liability under negligence, plaintiff deserves a certain duty of care, a rather nebulous concept of tort law.

The terminology of tort law is no less different than other areas of law prevalent in the world. For instance, if we talk about tort law, the French-inspired system used words such as delits or quasi delits. In German words used for tort law is Unlawful acts. Despite differences in their terminology, this area is mainly concerned towards liability.

Our Assignment expert team will provide you with more access to this topic and directory of famous tort civil lawsuits that helped in shaping tort laws we see today.

Tort-law

Categories of Tort law

Intentional Torts

Just as the name suggests, an act committed using an intent to harm another physically, mentally or financially comes under intentional torts. It relates to deliberately interfere or infringe an individual’s right to physical safety, control over property, privacy, freedom from deception and confinement and emotional inequality. Intentional Torts includes issues such as the battery, assaults, false imprisonment, theft, trespassing, fraud and deception.

Logical reasoning example according to intentional tort law

For example, Jacobs stops at a local pub for a few beers before he heads back to his journey to another city. After drinking a couple of beer, Jacobs gets back to his car and run over a stop sign, ramming his car into another car, seriously injuring its occupants. Although Jacob has every right to argue that he didn’t know he is going to hurt someone, it is expected that Jacob should be aware of “no drink and drive” policy of the state. After consumption of alcohol, the normal senses gets disturbed and it increases the chances of an accident, hence it is more likely to kill or injure someone.

Because Jacob drank alcohol on his own risk, knowing he planned on a journey ahead, and any sane person should know that drinking and driving are injurious, he henceforth has committed an intentional tort. In addition, Jacob may be charged with felony DUI.

Strict Liability Torts

Strict liability torts refer to the concept of imposing security and liability on a defendant, usually a factory owner or manufacturer, without proving negligent aspects, or intent to cause injury. The main objective of strict liability torts is to regulate certain activities that are acknowledged as a necessity to the society, but at the same time poses a high risk of danger to society.

Such activities include storage and transportation of hazardous substances, keeping wild creatures in captivity and blasting. The possibility of a civil lawsuit under strict liability arises when corporations and individuals who are in charge of such operations act diligently.

Civil lawsuit under strict liability tort

Under strict liability, the law assumes that the manufacturer or supplier of the product was aware of the deformity or defect existed before the product reached its consumers. Because of all this, The plaintiff only needs to prove that damages and harm occurred, and for that the defendant is responsible. TO successfully prove a strict liability tort in a civil lawsuit, the following items must be proven:

  1. The defendant is the manufacturer of the infected product.
  2. The product was infected when the plaintiff bought it.
  3. The defect was present when the supplier sold the product.
  4. The defect caused the plaintiff damages or injuries.
  5. The damages and injuries caused by the product’s infection were reasonably foreseeable by the acquittal.

A plaintiff in a civil lawsuit under strict liability may be awarded additional damages if he can prove that the defendant was aware of the defected product when the product was shipped to the customer.

Logical reasoning example according to Strict Liability tort

Jonnah buys a new car from her local car dealership. After three months, she felt that brakes were soft, so she took the car to the dealership’s service station. They informed her that her brake pads are rough, so they replaced them, with the new ones and sent Jonnah on her way. A month later, when Jonnah was driving on a busy lane, her brakes failed and she rammed the car into another car, Her car was severely damaged and Jonnah suffered from a concussion and a broken arm.

After getting treatment, she discovers that the brake problem she had been having with her car, the particular model had to face the same problem since it first released to the sale for the public. While digging deeper, Jonnah discovered that the local dealership knew about the issue, and the products they were offering is defective. Instead, they were determined to sell the product rather than bringing them all back to the factory to change out brake system.

In proving a civil lawsuit against local dealership, Jonnah must acquire these information to prove:

  • Local dealership manufacture or assembled the defective car.
  • The car’s brake system was faulty when she buys that car.
  • The car’s brake system was imperfect when Local dealership sold the car to Jonnah.
  • The brakes caused Jonnah’s injuries as well as other occupants present in another car.
  • It was reasonably evident that selling a defective car with imperfect brake system could cause some real injuries to customer.
  • The local dealership knew that the faulty brake system in the particular model of automobile company before they made it open for public, yet decided to sell them.

Negligent Torts

The acts which lead to the claims of injury or harm in negligent torts are not intentional rather they occur due to serious negligence. There are three specific elements which need to be satisfied in the lawsuit which claims of negligence.

  • The acquittal must have a duty of care or service which he owes to the plaintiff.
  • The defendant must have failed to oblige with certain measures which are promised to the plaintiff
  • The plaintiff has suffered an actual injury, loss or damages which was primarily caused by the negligence of the defendant’s actions.

Legal reasoning example according to negligence Tort

For instance, if a janitor has a duty to put on a sign depicting the wet floor, which he failed to put due to negligence. Some person was walking in a bit of rush and fells and injure himself badly, He has every right to file a civil lawsuit against the corporation and poor service.

  • The corporation owes a duty of reasonable care to the plaintiff.
  • The defendant did not attempt in a reasonable manner to express care.
  • Plaintiff suffered an actual injury as a result of the defendant’s inaction.
  • The injury caused some real financial damage.

Conclusion

Originally, criminal and tort law were indistinguishable, and even when both of them started acquiring different identities, for a very long time tort law was adopted as criminal law. But now the things have changed and in every legal system Tort law are taken as a common or civil wrong, and the remedies offered in tort law are in the form of compensation or damages. A law student is required to memorize and remember all tort laws, which can be hard for someone because there are hundreds of amendments. However, they can visit the Law Assignment help portal which offers free revision for 20 days even after they have submitted your assignment.