Nature, meaning, definition of tort

by

Introduction

The word tort has been derived from the Latin term , `tortum` , which means ‘ to twist’.

It is the same as the English term , ‘wrong’. Law of tort encompasses a variety of unlawful acts in which the wrongdoer violates some legal rights.

Meaning of tort

Tort means a conduct which is not straight or lawful, but, on the other hand , twisted, crooked , or unlawful.

Some definition of tort

  1. ” Tort means a civil wrong which is not exclusively a breach of contract or breach of trust”- S.2(m), the limitation Act , 1963
  2. “It is a civil wrong for which the remedy is a common law action for unliquidated damages and which is not exclusively the breach of a contract or breach of a trust or other merely equitable obligation “-Salmond
  3. “Tortious liability arises from the breach of a duty primarily fixed by the law : This duty is towards person generally and its breach is redressible by an action for unliquidated damages .” Winfield
  4. “It is an infringement of a right in rem of a private individual giving a right of compensation at the suit of the injured party.”-Fraser

Basic key points derived from definition

  1. Tort is a civil wrong .
  2. Tort is not a breach of contract or trust because every civil wrong is not a tort.
  3. Remedies for unliquidated damages .
  4. Legal rights are to be protected by torts.

Characteristics

1. Tort is a civil wrong.

As tort is a civil wrong the plaintiff is actionable towards damages. The civil action will be taken towards the wrong doer. There will be two parties, firstly the injured party i.e. plaintiff and the second party will be the wrong doer i.e. defendant. The defendant will compensate the damages o the plaintiff.

2. Tort is other than a mere breach of contract.

Tort is a civil wrong. For an instance, if we want to check the wrong of what kind , firstly check whether the wrong is civil or criminal. If it is civil than check whether it is a part of breach of contract or other civil wrong because all the civil wrong are not tort.

3. Tort is redressable by an action for unliquidated damages

The most important are damages as a remedy in tort. Whenever someone committed a civil wrong most probably the party compensate with money to the plaintiff or the person who is injured on the other hand, in other civil wrong the damages are liquidated.

Nature of tort

1. Tort and crime differentiate .

  • Any kind of wrongs that are less serious are likely to be private i.e. civil wrong . Where as ,more serious which are and are public in nature are criminal wrong or crime.
  • Tort is an uncodified law whereas the criminal law are codified nature
  • Imprisonment is a form of punishment under criminal law. On the other hand , in case of tort ,the ends of justice are met by awarding compensation to the injured party.

2. Tort and breach of contract differentiate

  • In tort duties are not imposed towards any specific individual or individuals , on the other hand duties have been entitled on individuals in case of breach of contract.
  • Damages in case of tort are not pre determined so they are unliquidated but when damages are pre determined then there will be liquidated damages or breach of contract.

Donoghue vs. Stevenson

In this case, the consumer who consume the product could bring an action towards him(manufaturer ) because of the negligence of his duty towards the consumer of his product.

Essentials of a tort

1. Act or omission

To render a person accountable for a tort he must have done something he was expected to do or have failed to do something he was intended to do. Either a wrongful act or an omission which is illegally made, will make a person liable.

2. Legal damage

Legal damage of any person is considered when he/she has been facing any violation of their legal rights. A person can not take any action until and unless they did not prove the legal damage caused to them.

Injuria sine damno

This maxim means the violation or infringement of a right without causing any substantial harm . Such torts are actionable without any proof of some damage caused by an act.

Ashby vs. White

This case explains the maxim where defendant’s action do not cause any damage but plaintiff still succeeded The court also affirm in Favour of Ashby by suggesting that he was entitled to damages for the unlawful denial of voting rights.

Damnum sine injuria

It means that the damages are caused but no legal rights are violated. So that these are not actionable .Without the violation of any legal rights the injured person can not claim any damages.

Gloucester Grammer school case,

The defendant started a new school nearby the plaintiff’s school. Due to which the plaintiff had to reduce fee from 40 pence to 12 pence per scholar per quarter. Finally it was held that the defendant cause no legal rights violation to the plaintiff, so that no remedy for the loss will be caused .

Leave a Comment

Leave a Comment