Tort Law

Front 1

Tort

Back 1

Breach of duty of care where the breach causes injury or loss to that party.

Front 2

Donoghue v. Stevenson

Back 2

Ginger beer bottle case. Previously no contract would exist between manufacturer and end consumer. So tort was created.

Front 3

4 Negligence requirements

Back 3

1. Duty of care was owed

2. Duty was breached

3. Loss or damage incurred

4. Breach was proximate cause of loss

Front 4

3 types of intentional torts

Back 4

Fraud, trespass, defamation

Front 5

2 types of unintentional tort

Back 5

Negligence, negligent misrepresentation

Front 6

Duty of care (Reasonable foreseeability )

Back 6

DoC must be owed in a negligence claim. For example an engineer designing a bridge should reasonably foresee that a person may be injured if the bridge collapsed, therefore a duty of care is owed

Front 7

Standard of care

Back 7

Level of skill and care required of a person. Higher for architects and engineers. Expert evidence often used to establish.

Front 8

3 types of intentional torts

Back 8

Fraud, trespass, defamation

Front 9

2 types of unintentional tort

Back 9

Negligence, negligent misrepresentation

Front 10

Duty of care (Reasonable foreseeability )

Back 10

DoC must be owed in a negligence claim. For example an engineer designing a bridge should reasonably foresee that a person may be injured if the bridge collapsed, therefore a duty of care is owed

Front 11

Standard of care

Back 11

Level of skill and care required of a person. Higher for architects and engineers. Expert evidence often used to establish. Experts even higher still.

Front 12

Proximate cause

Back 12

The but for test: “but for the breach, the loss would not have occurred.” The cause has to play a significant role in the loss. Opposite would be one that is too remote.

Front 13

Tortious misrepresentation

Back 13

Can be innocent, negligent or fraudulent. This is a false statement rather than an action.

Front 14

Fraud

Back 14

Also known as deceit. This is an intentional tort.

Front 15

Fiduciary duty

Back 15

Heightened duty to care for the interest of another party. Vulnerability and trust help determine if one exists .

Front 16

Strict liability

Back 16

Doctrine of tort law under which the defendant may be held liable to the plaintiff regardless of whether the defendant was negligent. Such as which a trespass, where the plaintiff only has to prove the defendant entered their property without consent.

Front 17

Trespass

Back 17

Unauthorized entry onto land of someone else, including subsurface and airspace.

Front 18

Duty to warn

Back 18

Professionals owe a duty to warn of impending damage. Law holds a high standard and requires they take reasonable and some cases more than reasonable. Such as in the water desalination example.

Front 19

Product liability

Back 19

Liability of the manufacturer to a consumer for a defective product. Failure of product causing loss/damage can be a breach of contract. Also, duty of warn can be cause of a claim if not enough warnings were given.

Front 20

Learned intermediary

Back 20

A person positioned between the manufacturer of a product and the consumer, a person who has specialized technical knowledge and whom the law imposes a duty to warn the consumer. Consider the case of the enclosed basement, where an expert came in to inspect the space. The plaintiff used the paint, and a pilot light from the water heater ignited the fumes, causing an explosion. The question of the case was whether the expert was a learned intermediate and owed a duty to warn of the risk.

Front 21

Limitation period

Back 21

Think: statute of limitations. In British Columbia it is two years from the breach.

Front 22

Joint and several liability

Back 22

Several liability: where the plaintiff is partially at fault, there are responsible for only their portion of the loss. Where the plaintiff is not at fault at all, they can recover 100 % of the damages from either party.

Front 23

Limitation period

Back 23

Think: statute of limitations. In British Columbia it is two years from the breach.

Front 24

Joint and several liability

Back 24

Several liability: where the plaintiff is partially at fault, there are responsible for only their portion of the loss. Where the plaintiff is not at fault at all, they can recover 100 % of the damages from either party.

Front 25

Vicarious liability

Back 25

Liability for the fault of another. An employee-employer relationship must exist. Based on the premise that those that profit from an activity should also be liable for losses that result from that activity.