Law 2101 - Tort Law

Front 1

How is the term "tort" defined as?

Back 1

It may be defined as the wrong other than a breach of contract that the courts will redress by way of monetary damages.

Front 2

What does the law of torts concern?

Back 2

It concerns a diverse class of compensable wrongs. Tort actions are commenced by the victims of wrongs (plaintiffs) in order to receive monetary compensation (damages) from alleged intentional or unintentional wrongdoers (defendants).

Front 3

True or False:
Tort liability normally depends on the existence of a contractual or there is always a prior relationship between the plaintiff and the defendant.

Back 3

False., this is not true.

Front 4

What are the bases for imposing liability in Tort Law?

Back 4

1. Intentional Torts
2. Negligence
3. Strict Liability
4. Absolute Liability

Front 5

What is an intentional tort based on?

Back 5

Intentional torts are based on the defendant's intention to interfere with the plaintiff's person or property.

Front 6

What are negligence actions based on?

Back 6

Negligence actions are based on the defendants carelessness or unintentional wrongdoing.

Front 7

When does strict liability arise?

Back 7

Strict liability arises in limited situations in the absence of intent or negligence but is subject to some defenses.

Front 8

When does absolute liability arise?

Back 8

Absolute liability arises simply because the defendant did a proscribed (forbidden) act that caused the plaintiff a loss.

Front 9

What is the main aim of tort law?

Back 9

To compensate plaintiffs for legal wrongs and injuries caused by defendants.

Front 10

What is the difference between tort and criminal law?

Back 10

The primary purpose of criminal law is to protect and vindicate the interests of the public by punishing the offender and deterring others. In tort law, the plaintiff is usually motivated by the prospect of obtaining compensation from the wrongdoer.

Front 11

Which of the following statements is false?

1) A single incident can give rise to multiple tort actions.
2) The primary aim of tort law is to compensate the plaintiff for his/her injuries.
3) All tort actions require a pre-existing contractual relationship between the parties.
4) A party can be liable for some torts even if that party has not been negligent, and they did not intend to commit the tort.

Back 11

3) All tort actions require a pre-existing contractual relationship between the parties.

Front 12

Which of the following statements is true about the case of Bettel v. Yim?

1) The defendant was held liable in battery for all injuries suffered, since a person who commits a battery is liable for all the consequences that result from it, whether or not those consequences were intended.
2) The defendant was found to have been acting in self-defence.
3) The defendant was held liable in battery only for the injuries he intended to inflict upon the plaintiff, because it is unreasonable to hold persons liable for the unintended consequences of their tortious actions.
4) The defendant did not intend to bring about offensive or harmful contact with the plaintiff.

Back 12

) The defendant was held liable in battery for all injuries suffered, since a person who commits a battery is liable for all the consequences that result from it, whether or not those consequences were intended.

The defendant was liable for all injuries resulting from a battery.

Front 13

Which of the following statements is true?

1) Fraud always negates an otherwise valid consent.
2) If someone consents under the threat of immediate physical force, this consent will be deemed to be valid by the courts.
3) Public policy reasons can negate an otherwise valid consent.
4) When someone consents to an act, they are not usually consenting to the risks normally inherent in the act.

Back 13

3) Public policy reasons can negate an otherwise valid consent.

Front 14

Which of the following statements is true?

1) There is no remedy for any invasion of privacy at common law.
2) Videotaping a person in public without his or her consent will result in liability for invasion of privacy.
3) A common law tort action for the invasion of privacy arises for only certain limited categories of intrusive behaviour.
4) There is a general common law tort for the invasion of common law.

Back 14

4) A common law tort action for the invasion of privacy arises for only certain limited categories of intrusive behaviour.

Front 15

Which of the following statements is false?

1) To successfully invoke the defence of third parties, the defendant must have previously known the person he or she was defending.
2) Individuals may be able to successfully invoke self-defence when they have used pre-emptive force to prevent what they reasonably believed was an impending physical assault.
3) In Canada, a person may not use deadly force against a home invader simply because the invader is present in the house.
4) A person cannot invoke self-defence once the danger has passed.

Back 15

4) To successfully invoke the defence of third parties, the defendant must have previously known the person he or she was defending.

Front 16

In a negligence action, the defendant has the burden of proving which of the following?


1) Both any defences and that he or she did not cause the plaintiff's injuries.
2) That he or she did not cause the plaintiff's injuries.
3) Any defences to a negligence action.
4) That there exists a duty of care.

Back 16

3) Any defences to a negligence action.

Front 17

What statement best describes the Supreme Court of Canada’s majority ruling in Dobson (Litigation Guardian) v. Dobson?

1) This case illustrates the Supreme Court’s tendency to expand the duty of care.
2) Pregnant women do not owe a duty of care in law to their foetus.
3) Pregnant women owe the same duty of care to their foetus as they would to any other user of the road.
4) The autonomy of pregnant women necessitates that they do not owe anyone a duty of care when they are driving.

Back 17

2) Pregnant women do not owe a duty of care in law to their foetus.

Front 18

Which of the following statements is true?

1) A driver who is not at fault has no duty to rescue and render aid in a crash caused by a negligent driver.
2) All individuals have a duty to rescue and render aid, if they can save someone from serious harm without endangering themselves.
3) An innocent bystander at the scene of a car crash has no duty to rescue and render aid.
4) Teachers have no greater duty to rescue and render aid to one of their pupils than members of the general public.

Back 18

3) An innocent bystander at the scene of a car crash has no duty to rescue and render aid.

Front 19

True or False:
A resort can be held liable for injuries sustained by a drunk patron they have over-served, even if the patron had a few drinks before coming to the resort.

Back 19

True. Read T-24 to understand why.

Front 20

Which of the following statements is false?

1) A manufacturer must warn consumers not only of risks about which it knows, but also risks about which it ought to know.
2) The manufacturer’s duty to warn stops once the consumer has purchased the product.
3) A manufacturer does not have to warn about risks that are obvious or well-known.
4) In certain circumstances, manufacturers can discharge their duty to warn by adequately disclosing all risks to a "learned intermediary."

Back 20

2) The manufacturer’s duty to warn stops once the consumer has purchased the product.

Front 21

Which of the following would NOT be protected by the "responsible journalism" defence?

1) An article on police failure to enforce highway safety, based on months of in-depth research and containing a reply by the Ontario Minister for Transport.
2) A sensational front-page story in which an Ottawa window-cleaner alleges that the male Prime Minister likes to parade around his bedroom in women's clothing.
3) A well-researched article about poor standards of hygiene in hospitals.
4) A balanced journalistic investigation into corruption among MPs, that reports all sides of the story.

Back 21

) A sensational front-page story in which an Ottawa window-cleaner alleges that the male Prime Minister likes to parade around his bedroom in women's clothing.

Front 22

Dr. Burke is a surgeon with an injured hand. This injury causes his hand to tremble sometimes without any warning. In spite of this, Dr. Burke continues to operate over a period of weeks. During surgery one day, Dr. Burke’s hand starts to tremble, and his patient is rendered a paraplegic. To what standard of care will he be held?


1) A subjective standard of his own best efforts.
2) The standard of the reasonable person.
3) The standard of a reasonable surgeon.
4) None of the above.

Back 22

3) The standard of a reasonable surgeon.

Front 23

Using the "but for" test of causation, which of the following injuries were NOT caused by John, who was driving drunk?

1) John runs over and breaks Bill’s leg (injury = broken leg).
2) John hits Bill, breaking his leg. Bill, a haemophiliac, also suffers significant blood loss and becomes brain damaged (injury = broken leg and brain damage).
3) John hits Bill. Bill, who is a haemophiliac, suffers significant blood loss and becomes brain damaged (injury = brain damage).
4) John sideswipes an ambulance. The ambulance was bringing Bill, who had suffered a heart attack, to the hospital. The accident caused a total delay of 5 minutes. Bill died in the ambulance shortly after the accident. He would have been saved if he had made it to the hospital. At the time Bill died, he was another 10 minutes away from the hospital (injury = death).

Back 23

4) John sideswipes an ambulance. The ambulance was bringing Bill, who had suffered a heart attack, to the hospital. The accident caused a total delay of 5 minutes. Bill died in the ambulance shortly after the accident. He would have been saved if he had made it to the hospital. At the time Bill died, he was another 10 minutes away from the hospital (injury = death).

Front 24

The plaintiff's damages will not be too remote in law to be recoverable if:

1) They are a direct result of the defendant's negligence.
2) They are a possible result of the defendant's negligence.
3) They are a foreseeable result of the defendant's negligence.
4) They are an indirect, but possible, result of the defendant's negligence.

Back 24

3) They are a foreseeable result of the defendant's negligence.

Front 25

Which statement best describes the ruling in Gagnon v. Beaulieu?

1) The burden of proof is on the plaintiff to show that his or her injuries would have occurred even if he or she had been wearing a seatbelt.
2) If wearing a seatbelt would have prevented the injuries suffered by the plaintiff, he or she will be held to be contributorily negligent.
3) An injured plaintiff who was not wearing a seatbelt in a traffic accident will always be contributorily negligent.
4) The plaintiff’s views are relevant in deciding whether wearing a seatbelt is reasonable in the circumstances.

Back 25

2) If wearing a seatbelt would have prevented the injuries suffered by the plaintiff, he or she will be held to be contributorily negligent.

Front 26

True or False: You are the judge in a personal injury case. It has come to the part of the trial where you have to explain the "reasonable person" test to the jury. In order to help the jury fully understand how the reasonable person would act, you should tell the jury to put themselves in the situation, and decide how they would have acted.

Back 26

False.

Front 27

What is the difference between contract and tort law?

Back 27

They both give rise to civil actions initiated by individuals to obtain damages.

In contract law, the parties themselves determined their mutual obligations, and they could only sue when the contract was breached.

In tort law, the obligations are imposed by the operations of general principals of law, rather than by agreement.

Front 28

True or False:
Tort law, criminal law, contract law, property law etc. are all mutually exclusive.

Back 28

False, Tort law may have some dealings with all of these.

Front 29

What was the primary objective of the law in Anglo-Saxan England?

Back 29

To prevent blood feuds among the clans.

Front 30

When did academics and lawyers begin to speak of torts as a distinct branch of law?

Back 30

The end of the 19th century.

Front 31

Generally, when will a defendant be held liable for an intentional tort?

Back 31

If their conduct is both voluntary and intentional.

Front 32

When is the requisite of volition present?

Back 32

It is present if the defendant exercised control over his or her physical actions. A defendants act is voluntary if it was directed by his or her conscious mind.

Front 33

What does the term "intent" refer to in Tort Law?

Back 33

It refers to the actor's desire to bring about the results or consequences of his act, rather than his desire to do the physical act itself.

Front 34

A defendant, believing he is alone in a forest, shoots at a tin can and hits it, but the bullet ricochets and strikes the plaintiff. The plaintiff is suing the defendant for intentional tort of battery. Would this action pass or fail?

Back 34

The consequence of the defendant hitting the tin can is intentional because the defendant desired to shoot that object.

The relevant issue is whether or not the defendant desired to cause an offensive or harmful physical contact with the plaintiff. Since the shooting of the plaintiff was unintentional, this action would fail.

Front 35

Can a single act bring about several consequences.

Back 35

Yes. For example, a bullet can ricochet and hit more than one thing at once.

Front 36

True or False:
Suppliers are expected to have the same level of knowledge of products as the manufacturer.

Back 36

False, they are not expected to have the same level of expertise as the manufacturers, but are expected to have greater knowledge of the consumer's level of understanding.

Front 37

When does a claim for a wrongful pregnancy arise?

Back 37

It arises when a doctor negligently fails to successfully perform an abortion or sterilization procedure. Generally, courts will not award damages for the cost of the child-rearing unless the child is disabled.

Front 38

What is tort of battery?

Back 38

Tort of battery is defined as bringing about a harmful or socially offensive physical contact with the person of another. The tort is broadly consistent with the law's focus on protecting the physical autonomy and dignity of the individual. The tort includes anything that a person is wearing, carrying or riding upon.

Front 39

When referring to tort of battery, are courts likely to award substantial damages even in the absence of significant physical harm?

Back 39

Yes, as long as the intentional conduct is degrading as is in the case of a plaintiff being spit on.

Front 40

What is the proper test for determining liability in intentional torts (such as battery)?

Back 40

Whether the defendant was guilty of deliberate, intentional and unlawful violence or threats of violence. If he was, and a more serious harm befalls the plaintiff than was intended by the defendant, the defendant, and not the plaintiff, must bear the responsibility for the unintended result.

Front 41

How is the term "assault" defined as?

Back 41

It is defined as the intentional creation in the mind of another of a reasonable apprehension of imminent physical contact. It is more narrowly defined in civil law than it is in criminal law.

Front 42

True or False:
Future threats and conditional threats that do not require the plaintiff to take immediate action do not constitute assaults, because they lack the requirement of imminent physical contact.

Back 42

True.

Front 43

In the case of Holcombe v. Whitaker, the defendant threatened to kill the plaintiff if she took him to court and came to her apartment and beat on the door and tried to pry it open. Is this an assault?

Back 43

Yes, it is constituted as an assault because according to the testimony offered on behalf of the plaintiff, the defendant succeeded in his efforts to frighten the plaintiff. While words alone cannot constitute an assault, they may give meaning to an act and both, taken together, may constitute an assault.

Front 44

How is a tort of false imprisonment defined?

Back 44

It may be defined a the intentional bringing about of a total restraint of movement. The plaintiff may recover even if he or she was unaware of the restraint at the time or suffered no harm as a result. The restraint of movement must be total, even if only momentary.

Front 45

What was the ruling in Campbell v. S.S. Kresge Co. where a woman was stopped by a Corporal because he was informed that she had stolen an item and put it in her pocket and he asked her to come inside the store to avoid embarrassment to both her and himself?

Back 45

The Corporal was imprisoning the plaintiff from the time she was confronted outside the store until the time she was told that she was free to go. If he was not going to arrest her and there was no one present to observe what was going on, then there could have been no "embarrassment" to be avoided and they could easily have had their discussion in the parking lot. The damages which she suffered are limited to her personal inconvenience and upset arising from the incident, and the damaged were assessed in the amount of $500.

Front 46

What is a tort of indirect interference with the person?

Back 46

It is a tort that is premised on the defendant's intention but different from traditional intentional torts because these involve indirect interference with the person. Alternatively, some of these torts focus on personal interests other than physical integrity.

Front 47

What is a tort of malicious prosecution?

Back 47

A tort that is defined as the groundless initiation of criminal proceedings against the plaintiff which terminate in the plaintiff's favour and are brought out of malice or for some other improper purpose.

Front 48

Does unwanted media attention constitute an actionable invasion of privacy?

Back 48

Yes, Canadian courts have accepted this.

Front 49

What is appropriation of personality?

Back 49

The unauthorized use of a person's name of likeness.

Front 50

What was the ruling in the case of Ste Marie c. Placements J.M.P. Marquis where the employer tapped the phone line that the employee uses and recorded a conversation between the employee and safecracker and the employee sued for an invasion of privacy?

Back 50

The Court dismissed the claim stating that the employees have a diminished expectation of privacy as their rights must be reconciled with their contractual and other duties to their employer.

Front 51

What was the ruling in Lipiec v. Borsa where the defendants were obsessed with the plaintiff's backyard and installed a surveillance camera to constantly monitor the backyard?

Back 51

The Court held the defendants liable for invasion of privacy. The Court stated that there is considerable authority which could support redress against overlooking or spying on the premises of others for the sole purpose of causing annoyance.

Front 52

What was the ruling in the case of Milner v. Manufacturers Life Insurance where the plaintiff applied for disability insurance but the defendant believed that the application was based on false claims?

Back 52

The Court dismissed the plaintiff's claim of a breach of privacy and stated that the defendant had a legitimate interests in conducting video surveillance, given the nature of the plaintiff's claim and her questionable credibility.

Front 53

What is a tort of breach of confidence?

Back 53

The tort action for breach of confidence is the wrongful disclosure of confidential information by an individual who owes a fiduciary duty.

Front 54

In a tort of breach of contract, what must the plaintiff prove in order for the claim to be held true?

Back 54

The plaintiff must prove that:

1. The information was confidential in nature
2. It was disclosed in circumstances creating an obligation of confidentiality
3. It's unauthorized use was detrimental to the confider.

Front 55

What was the ruling in the case of Cadbury Schweppes Inc. v. FBI Foods Ltd. where the defendant company obtained the secret formula of a cocktail production. The defendant used this information to create a similar beverage which sold well and was a corresponding decrease in the plaintiff company's sales?

Back 55

The Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court agreed that the defendant company's wrongful use of the information was a breach of confidence. The plaintiff was ultimately awarded the profits that it lost as a result of the defendant's breach.

Front 56

What was the ruling in the case of Szarfer v. Chodos where the plaintiff hired a lawyer and confided in his lawyer that he and his wife were having marital problems and considering a divorce. The lawyer then had an affair with the plaintiff's wife?

Back 56

The Court held that fiduciary relationship between a lawyer and the client forbids the lawyer from using confidential information obtained within the scope of the professional relationship for his own benefit. The lawyer was ordered to pay the plaintiff more than $43000 for the breach of confidence and trust.

Front 57

True or False:
Consent to an act generally extend to all risks normally inherent in that act.

Back 57

True.

Front 58

What was the ruling in the case of Norberg v. Wynrib where an elderly doctor continued an addicted patient's prescriptions to pain medications if she complied to his sexual advances?

Back 58

The Supreme Court unanimously upheld the woman's claim and awarded $20 000 in compensatory and $10 000, in punitive damages.

Front 59

What must a defendant be able to establish in the situation of self-defense?

Back 59

He must be able to establish that he reasonably believed that he was about to be struck or otherwise subject to a battery, and hat the amount of force he used in self-defence was reasonable.

Front 60

When does the defendant's right to claim self-defence end?

Back 60

When the danger has passed.

Front 61

True or False:
Self-defence is NOT a complete defence and if successfully invoked, will still not entirely absolve the defendant of liability.

Back 61

False, it is a complete defence and will absovle the defendant from liability if used correctly.

Front 62

When may a defendant use force that is likely to cause death or grievous bodily injury?

Back 62

Only if the person honestly believed that he or she is about to be killed or seriously injured.

Front 63

Do the general principals or self-defence apply equally to protecting third parties?

Back 63

Yes.

Front 64

What was the ruling in the case of Gambriell v. Caparelli where the plaintiff had a young boy in a choke hold on the ground when the defendant (the young boy's mother) came out and yelled at him to stop. When he did not stop, the defendant brought a three pronged cultivator with a five-foot long handle and struck the plaintiff three times on his shoulder and once on his head.

Back 64

The Court justified the force as not being excessive and upheld the mother's assertion fo the defence of third parties and absolved her of her liability.

Front 65

What was the ruling in R. v. Lavallee where a battered woman shot her partner in the back of his head when he was leaving a room.

Back 65

She was acquitted at trial and the Supreme Court upheld her acquittal on the basis of self-defence.

Front 66

What must a plaintiff prove in order for a negligence action to succeed?

Back 66

The plaintiff must prove that he or she has been injured or has suffered a loss through the defendant's carelessness.

Front 67

True or False:
In the case of a negligence action, the defendant always has to intend the harmful consequence of their action/inaction in order to be held liable.

Back 67

False, they do not have to intend the harmful consequence.

Front 68

True or False:
Negligence is the more frequently litigated tort.

Back 68

True

Front 69

True or False:
If a defendant is under a duty of care and breaches the required standard, he or she will always be held liable.

Back 69

False, the negligent conduct has to result in the cause of a plaintiff's loss.

Front 70

True or False:
Death and grief are not recoverable at common law.

Back 70

True, however in Ontario legislation it permits dependents and family members to recover for the financial losses and loss of care, guidance and companionship that results from another person's death.

Front 71

What are the three main defences for negligence?

Back 71

1. Contributory negligence
2. Voluntary assumption of risk
3. Participation in a criminal activity.

Front 72

True or False:
There is no common law duty to rescue and render aid, no matter how obvious or serious the situation, or how effortless it would be to assist.

Back 72

True

Front 73

When is it necessary for a defendant to render aid to the plaintiff?

Back 73

1. If the defendant has innocently or negligently created the situation or peril.
2. The defendant has physically worsened the plaintiff's position
3. The defendant has induced the plaintiff to rely upon him or her to the plaintiff's detriment
4. The defendant has deprived the plaintiff of other opportunities for aid
5. A "special relationship" exists between the parties

Front 74

What does a "special relationship" include?

Back 74

Parent/child, teacher/student, employer/employee, occupier/entrant...etc,

Front 75

What was the ruling in Crocker v. Sundance Northwest Resorts Ltd where a heavily intoxicated man was served more alcohol and then passed another tube to take part in a tube racing competition which is quite dangerous?

Back 75

The Supreme Court held the resort liable on two counts. One for serving him alcohol when he was already clearly intoxicated and the second for allowing him to take part in the dangerous tube racing competition.

Front 76

What was the ruling for the case of Mustafa v. Smith where the man was given daily passes because he was a voluntary patient in the psychiatric hospital. No diagnosis had been made but it was suspected that the patient suffered from mild depression and anxiety. The patient picked up two of his children and shot them and then committed suicide.

Back 76

The court held that Mustafic's conduct was not foreseeable as he had not evidenced any suicidal or homicidal tendencies. The doctor could not be held liable in negligence.

Front 77

What was the ruling of the case C.D. v. Newfoundland (Minister of Social Services) where a plaintiff was physically abused by her foster mother and sexually abused by her foster uncle for 12 years and social worker was called but had a personal relationship with the foster parents and did not intervene. Child Welfare was also called and left the plaintiff in the abusive household for 6 months after the situation in the household had clearly deteriorated.

Back 77

The social worker was liable in negligence for failing to reasonably monitor the home, for taking no action in the four months following the first allegation of abuse. The director of Child Welfare was held liable for the first social worker's negligence and for leaving the plaintiff in the foster home for six months after the situation has obviously deteriorated.

Front 78

If a parole officer knows of an offenders history of arson, do they have an obligation to inform the motel owner at which the offender is staying?

Back 78

Yes, they owe the motel owner a duty of care and must warn the owner of the motel that the offender has a history of arson.

Front 79

What was the ruling in the case of T (a minor) v. Surrey County Council where a babysitter had a history of violently shaking infants and an advisor had informally recommended her to a potential customer as a safe child care provider. After the infant had been put in the babysitters care, was violently shaken and it thereby caused brain damage?

Back 79

The Court held that the adviser knew or ought to have known that there were considerable ricks in placing any infant in the babysitter's care. The advisor and local authority were held liable for their negligent misstatements concerning Mrs. W's suitability.

Front 80

True or False:
Manufacturers in Canada do not have any obligation to inform consumers of the risks inherent in using their products.

Back 80

False, they do have this obligation.

Front 81

True or False:
Manufacturers do not need to warn consumers about risks which are obvious or well-known.

Back 81

True, they do not.

Ex. Knives will cut

Front 82

True or False:
A manufacturer is able to discharge its duty to warn by appropriately labeling the product or by providing cautions and instructions in printed material accompanying the product, so long as the accompanying warning is brought to the consumer's attention.

Back 82

True.

Front 83

When does a Pre-Conceptual wrong occur?

Back 83

When a defendant carelessly causes a parent to suffer an injury that detrimentally affects a subsequently-conceived child.

Ex. A mother and father were exposed to harmful chemicals that affected his sperm and her ova. The effects were visible upon the birth of their child.

Front 84

Why are wrongful birth and wrongful life claims problematic?

Back 84

Because they are based on the view that not being born is preferable to being born disabled.

Front 85

When does a wrongful birth and wrongful life claim arise?

Back 85

They arise when a physician fails to inform a woman that she suffers an unusually high risk of giving birth to a disabled child.

Front 86

What is the difference between a wrongful birth claim and a wrongful life claim? Are they both generally successful?

Back 86

A wrongful birth is when a physician fails to inform a woman that she suffers an unusually high risk of giving birth to a disabled child. When a parent brings up the claim, it is a wrongful birth. It is generally successful.

A wrongful life claim is when a child brings this claim. This is generally not successful.

Front 87

When do pre-natal injury claims arise?

Back 87

When a child who is born will have a claim for pre-natal injuries suffered in utero.