Torts Cases

Battery

Beyond everyday life

Positive act

Direct Contact

Intentional Battery

Intentional Act does not need to injure plaintiff, as long as intent was there

Consent

Consent - Capacity

Development stage recongised

Consent needs to be freely given

Consent given must not be exceeded

Assault - D has the means of carrying out threat

Imminent Contact

Apprehension reasonable (doesn't matter if fear felt)

False Imprisonment - Def. positively contributed to lack of liberty

Assault - Not necessary if the def. actually intended to carry through the threat

No reasonable venue of escape from imprisonment

Def. convinces pl. he has no means of escape/compens another to stay in a given place against will

Does not need to be aware of loss of liberty to be false imprisonment

Does not require physical constraint - could be total submission

Defence to Trespass to Person - Mistake: No difference if mistake is one of fact or law

Self defence: reasonable appropriate force to prevent harm - reasonable to defend oneself

Self defence: Force used in doing so was reasonable

Self defence - def continue use violence after danger

Defence of another - Reasonable to protect other person this way?

Amount of force reasonable at all times

Defence of One's Property

Defence of one's property: Reasonable belief that force is essential to end trespass

Provocation - Statutory

Provocation - Case Law

Inevitable Accident

Citizen's Arrest Statutory

Occupier has right to land statutory

Trespass to land protect ownership of land + privacy/security of owner

Land includes airspace for ordinary use + structures on land

Trespass to land - Direct interference

Cause foreign matter to come in contact with land = trespass

Intrusion to airspace

Transient intrusions

Lack of consent trespass - unjustifiable entry or interference

Remedies for trespass: Aggravated damages

Injunctions

Irreparable harm suffered if injunction refused

Abatement by self help

Defence to trespass = necessity

Defence to trespass = retake wrongfully withheld chattels

Defence to trespass = Eject from land on a person no longer right to remain there

Defence to trespass = inevitable accident = no fault on the part of the defendant

Defence to trespass = lawful authority: statute allows

Taking googs out of possession of another

Moving goods out of possession of another

Damaging/Destroying goods

Bringing one person into contact with the goods

Directing a missile at the goods/causing goods to come into harmful contact

Unauthorized use of goods

Trespass to Goods Direct: Locking a person's goods in the room once they've placed them i ntehre is not trespass to goods

No trespass in the case of accidental contact where no damage is done

No liability for acciental trespass to good which is not negligent

Trespass is intentional irrespective of whether the def. knew that the act was trespass

Plaintiff must be in possession of the good at the time of the unlawful interference

Possession: Power of exercising physical control

I

Intention to exercise such control on one's own belief

Bailee can sue in trespass

Bailor with right to possession can sue in conversion or detinue but not in trespass

Action on the case: Circumstances where violation of chattels not protected by trespass, conversion, detinue, or tort of negligence

Pl. must have possession of an immediate right to possession at the time of conversion

Not a requirement that the def. intended to deny pl. rights in conversion

Licensee of good are bailees and may be able to sue in conversion

Finder has greater right to chattel against later possessors

Conversion: To steal or seize under legal process without justification

Move chattels to an unreasonable place with consequent risk of loss

Deprive pl. use of goods for however a short period of time

Pl. hands over goods under duress

Refusal to surrender goods upon lawful and reasonable demand

Intentional destruction of goods in possession of another

Person in actual possession entitled to recover full value of those goods

Precise sequence of events leading to pl. injury need not be foresseable

Unforeseeable: Person has not fallen within a reasonable sphere or risk and therefore no duty of care has arisen

DOC Employer to Employee

DOC Occupier to Tenant

DOC Motorist to other road users

DOC Teacher to student

DOC Doctor to patient

Lord Atkin's Neighbour Principle!

Ann's Two Step Approach

Proximity

Reasonable Person

Reasonable Foreseeable (Breach of DOC) Case Law

Reasonable Foreseeable Breach of DOC Statute

Standard of care: Judged against the standard of a hypothetical reasonable person not against the conduct of others

Inexperience is not an excuse

People with special skill exempt from the rule of a reasonable person Statutory

Children not reasonable person

Probability of Harm Occurring

Magnitude/Gravity of Risk

Burden of Precautions

Social Utility of Defendants Conduct

Res Ipsa Loquitur

Causation - Pl. onus to prove damages on balance of probabilities Case law

Causation - Pl. has onus to prove damages on balance of probabilities Statute

Factual Causation Statute

But for Test case law

But For Test Statute

Common sense test statute

Common Sense Test Case Law

3rd party invervention

1st party intervention

Causation - Injury is relavently connected to breach of duty

Reasonable Foreseeability Test

Type of Damage Test

Egg shell skull rule

Volenti Non Fit Injuria - Risk accepted freely and voluntarily

Mere perception of the existence of danger will not establish volenti: Pl. must have fully comprehended the extent of the risk

Contributory Negligence Case Law

Contributory Negligence Statute

Plaintiff was careless for own safety

Contribution to injury: Plaintiff's negligence was the cause of injury

Obvious Risk Statute

Exemplary Damage Statute

Punitive damages Statute

Pecuniary Loss Statute

Pecuniary Loss Case Law

Losses - special and general damages

Loss of amenity statute

Loss of amenity case law

Pain and suffering

Loss of expectation of life

Material fact of decisive nature needed to extend limitation

Time starts at commencement of original tort even if subsequent acts doen to that chattel in cases of detinue or conversion

Limitations of Actions Statute