Tort Notes PDF
Tort Notes PDF
Tort Notes PDF
com
1. HIGH QUALITY.
2. BASED ON STANDARD SOURCES
3. POSSIBILITY OF DIRECT QUESTIONS
4. COMPLETELY SYLLABUS-ORIENTED.
It was derived from root word “ TORTUM” – meaning – wrong. Tort simply means a
deviation / civil wrong .
Rules and conventions that deals about torts. It is uncodified legal rules, developed
using judicial precedents ( cases decided by judiciary )
IMPORTANT TERMS
Tort feasor/ wrong doer – the person who commits the tort
Victim – the affected person
Plaintiff – the person who files the case
Defendant- the person against whom the case is filled.
Compensation- Money paid to compensate the loss caused to the victim
Liability – responsibility to cure the wrong committed.
DEFINITION OF TORTS : ( Need not memorize but make sure you are able to choose
the correct option when asked )
1) Salmond- "Tort is civil wrong, for which remedy is a common law action for
unliquidated damages, and which is not exclusively breach of contract or breach of
trust, or other merely equitable obligations".
2) Winfield and Jolowics- " Tortous liability arise from the breach of a duty primarily
fixed by law; this duty is towards persons generally and its breach is redressible by an
action for unliquidated damages "
3) Sir Frederick Pollock - Every tort is an act or omission (not merely the breach of a
duty arising out of a personal relation, or undertaken by contract) which causes harm
(including interference with an absolute right, whether there be measurable actual
damage or not) suffered by determinate Person .
The tort feasor is directed to pay damages / compensation money to the victim.
When legal right of a person is violated – tort is said to be committed against that
person
BRANCHES OF TORT :
They above are few identified torts other actions may also result in tort if they violate
legal right of a person
SHOOLS OF THOUHTS :
LAW OF TORT : According to this school of thought tort is committed when wrong is
done by a person. Recognizes general torts.
LAW OF TORTS : By this school of thought tort is committed only when the action of
the tort feasor falls under any one of the branches of specific torts viz. negligence,
defamation etc. Recognizes specific torts alone.
Tort law divides most specific torts into three general categories:
3. Strict Liability Torts – the result of harm incurred due to the actions of another,
with no fault of the defendant- but defendant made liable.
Meaning - injury to legal right without any monetary loss. Which implies – due to the
act of tort feasor there is violation of legal right but there is no loss in money or
property.
THINK ! WHETHER ACTION CAN BE TAKEN AGAINST TORT FEASOR WHEN THERE
IS NO MONETARY LOSS ?
This is actionable, because there is violation of legal right, even though plaintiff suffer
no loss in term of money the defendant is liable.
LANDMARK CASE:
Held ( What court said )– Defendant is liable to pay compensation because he has
violated legal right of plaintiff to vote. Even though plaintiff suffered no actual loss in
term of money, or the candidate to whom plaintiff was interested got elected, defendant
has committed a tort and therefore liable to pay compensation.
INDIAN CASE LAW ! MUST KNOW !
Bhim Singh vs. FACTS : Plaintiff MLA was HELD : Legal right of MLA to Above
State of Jammu wrongfully prevented by attend session violated- thus principle
and Kashmir police from attending damages given (more money – applied.
assembly session. exemplary damages given.
Meaning - damages , monetary loss, caused to the plaintiff without violation of legal
right.
THINK 1 WHETHER ACTION CAN BE TAKEN FOR MONEY LOSS OCCURRED TO THE
PLAINTIFF WITHOUT VIOLATION IN LEGAL RIGHT ?
Not actionable because no injury to legal right. Thus violation of legal right is necessary
for tort.
Facts - Corporation of Bradford was supplying water from its well. Defendant was
having adjacent land to the corporation land wherein there was well. Defendant was
willing to sell his land. He approached the mayor of corporation. Negotiations failed.
Defendant dug well in his own land .thereby cutting the underground supply of water of
corporation well this has caused a loss to corporation because there was no adequate
supply of water to the people of corporation. Plaintiff sued Defendant for damages for
malice.
Held - Defendant is not liable, because defendant's act is not wrongful as not violated
legal right or plaintiff. There is factual malice, ill will digging well in his own land does
not amount to tort.
POINTS TO REMEMBER :