- Главная
- Разное
- Дизайн
- Бизнес и предпринимательство
- Аналитика
- Образование
- Развлечения
- Красота и здоровье
- Финансы
- Государство
- Путешествия
- Спорт
- Недвижимость
- Армия
- Графика
- Культурология
- Еда и кулинария
- Лингвистика
- Английский язык
- Астрономия
- Алгебра
- Биология
- География
- Детские презентации
- Информатика
- История
- Литература
- Маркетинг
- Математика
- Медицина
- Менеджмент
- Музыка
- МХК
- Немецкий язык
- ОБЖ
- Обществознание
- Окружающий мир
- Педагогика
- Русский язык
- Технология
- Физика
- Философия
- Химия
- Шаблоны, картинки для презентаций
- Экология
- Экономика
- Юриспруденция
Law of torts. Intentional torts презентация
Содержание
- 1. Law of torts. Intentional torts
- 2. Concept of civil wrong vs. criminal act
- 3. Vicarious liability: One person (e.g. a
- 4. Liability may be imposed even in the
- 5. False Imprisonment: Elements: Deprivation of
- 6. Provides a remedy in cases where a
- 7. Elements: Entry onto land without owners permission
- 8. Assault: Elements: Threat of imminent physical
- 9. Physical contact without permission (offensive bodily
- 10. Wilful (intentional) violation of privacy by doing
- 11. Elements: Unauthorized use of or interference
- 12. Elements: Damaging reputation of another person
- 13. Innocent dissemination (libraries etc) Absolute privilege
- 14. Marketing product (based on physical characteristics,
- 15. False statements about a business which
- 16. Elements: Intention on part of
- 17. Unreasonable interference with use and of enjoyment
- 18. Defendant strictly liable for escape of something
- 19. Consent Self Defence Legal Authority Necessity
Слайд 2Concept of civil wrong vs. criminal act
Note:
The same act may
give rise to both criminal and tortious liability.
How are each types of wrong remedied?
What is the underlying right that each tort aims to vindicate?
Intentional vs. Unintentional Torts
How are each types of wrong remedied?
What is the underlying right that each tort aims to vindicate?
Intentional vs. Unintentional Torts
WHAT IS A TORT?
Слайд 3Vicarious liability:
One person (e.g. a business) can be held legally
responsible for the wrongful (tortious) actions of someone else (e.g. an employee) owing to an underlying legal relationship between them.
Bazley v. Curry – Page 71
Joint and Several Liability:
Two or more persons may each individually have full (several liability) responsibility for wrongful conduct and its consequences or may be collectively (joint liability) responsible for such conduct.
Bazley v. Curry – Page 71
Joint and Several Liability:
Two or more persons may each individually have full (several liability) responsibility for wrongful conduct and its consequences or may be collectively (joint liability) responsible for such conduct.
IMPORTANT LEGAL CONCEPTS
Слайд 4Liability may be imposed even in the absence of fault.
What are
the underlying reasons for this?
Cowles v. Balac- Page 68
Cowles v. Balac- Page 68
STRICT LIABILITY
Слайд 5False Imprisonment:
Elements:
Deprivation of liberty
Without lawful authority
Against will of person detained
Note:
Physical restraint
may suffice but is not necessary.
Threat of physical restraint may suffice
Threat of physical restraint may suffice
INTENTIONAL
TORTS:
FALSE IMPRISONMENT
Слайд 6Provides a remedy in cases where a Defendant has caused a
Plaintiff to be improperly prosecuted:
Elements:
Defendant caused Plaintiff to be arrested and charged
Prosecution terminated in
Plaintiff’s favour
(iii) Presence of improper motive in
Defendant (malice – no
reasonable grounds for causing
the “prosecution”
Elements:
Defendant caused Plaintiff to be arrested and charged
Prosecution terminated in
Plaintiff’s favour
(iii) Presence of improper motive in
Defendant (malice – no
reasonable grounds for causing
the “prosecution”
MALICIOUS PROSECUTION
Слайд 7Elements:
Entry onto land without owners permission or some lawful right to
do so. (Improper interference with land)
Implied vs. express permission to enter onto land.
Permission to enter which was initially granted might be revoked (e.g. shopping malls)
Might be committed innocently
Defence: permission to enter land
Implied vs. express permission to enter onto land.
Permission to enter which was initially granted might be revoked (e.g. shopping malls)
Might be committed innocently
Defence: permission to enter land
TRESPASS
Слайд 8Assault:
Elements:
Threat of imminent physical harm (violence)
Causing reasonable belief that offensive bodily
contact is imminent
Immediate possibility of carrying out threat
Issue: Does the Plaintiff have a
reasomable belief that physical
contact will occur? (The unloaded
gun)
Immediate possibility of carrying out threat
Issue: Does the Plaintiff have a
reasomable belief that physical
contact will occur? (The unloaded
gun)
INTENTIONAL TORTS:
ASSAULT
Слайд 9Physical contact without permission
(offensive bodily contact)
Note: battery in medical cases
(no
consent of Plaintiff to treatment)
Defence: Self Defence but note issue
of proportionality.
To prove self defence Plaintiff must prove genuine fear of injury from Defendant (honest belief)
Vasey v. Wosk’s Ltd. – Page 84
consent of Plaintiff to treatment)
Defence: Self Defence but note issue
of proportionality.
To prove self defence Plaintiff must prove genuine fear of injury from Defendant (honest belief)
Vasey v. Wosk’s Ltd. – Page 84
BATTERY
Слайд 10Wilful (intentional) violation of privacy by doing something which is wrong
(without legal justification)
Jones v. Tsige – Page 86
Hollinsworth v. BCTV – Page 87
Jones v. Tsige – Page 86
Hollinsworth v. BCTV – Page 87
INVASION OF PRIVACY
Слайд 11Elements:
Unauthorized use of or interference with the property of another
Immaterial whether
property initially came into Defendant’s possession lawfully.
CONVERSION
Слайд 12Elements:
Damaging reputation of another person by making untrue statement
Test is
“does the statement made cause other persons to think less of the Plaintiff?”
May be in two forms: libel and slander.
Defamatory statement must be published
May be in two forms: libel and slander.
Defamatory statement must be published
INTENTIONAL TORTS:
DEFAMATION
Слайд 13Innocent dissemination (libraries etc)
Absolute privilege
Qualified privilege
Fair comment
DEFENCES TO DEFAMATION
Слайд 14Marketing product (based on
physical characteristics, labeling etc)
in such a
manner as to confuse public
that is that of another person or is
associated with another company
(piggybacking on business reputation
of another)
Passing off is misrepresentation of
origin of product or service
that is that of another person or is
associated with another company
(piggybacking on business reputation
of another)
Passing off is misrepresentation of
origin of product or service
INTENTIONAL TORTS:
PASSING OFF
Слайд 15False statements about a business
which causes the business to suffer
a
Loss (E.g- disparaging a competitor’s
product)
Loss (E.g- disparaging a competitor’s
product)
INJURIOUS FALSEHOOD
Слайд 16
Elements:
Intention on part of defendant to injure business of another person.
Interference
by illegal or improper
means
- Quantifiable harm
Examples:
Inducing breach of contract
Business intimidation which affects business interests
Inducing breach of duty to maintain information confidential.
See: Lumley v. Gye – Page 110
Reach MD – Page 111
means
- Quantifiable harm
Examples:
Inducing breach of contract
Business intimidation which affects business interests
Inducing breach of duty to maintain information confidential.
See: Lumley v. Gye – Page 110
Reach MD – Page 111
UNLAWFUL INTERFERENCE WITH ECONOMIC RELATIONS
Слайд 17Unreasonable interference with use and of enjoyment of property
E.g:
Loud noises
Smells
Fumes
INTENTIONAL TORTS:
NUISANCE
Слайд 18Defendant strictly liable for escape of something from his property arising
from non-natural use of the property
RULE IN RYLANDS V. FLETCHER
Слайд 19Consent
Self Defence
Legal Authority
Necessity
Voluntary assumption of risk
DEFENCES TO INTENTIONAL TORTS
