This document summarizes three main types of torts: product liability, intentional tort, and negligence. Product liability concerns a manufacturer's responsibility to ensure safe products that do not cause harm. Intentional torts involve intentional acts that result in civil wrong, while negligence results from failure to take sufficient care. The document also discusses elements to prove negligence, including duty and proximate cause between the defendant's actions and plaintiff's injuries. Finally, it covers compensatory and punitive damages, with the former meant to compensate for harm and the latter to punish outrageous conduct.

1. TYPES OF
TORT.
SEMINARIO DE INGLES JURIDICO. EQUIPO DE TRABAJO EN INGLES JURIDICO EN LA
UNIVERSIDAD CATÓLICA DE CUYO SEDE SAN LUIS
AÑO 2019.
ADELA PEREZ DEL VISO-
DANIELA ZABALA.-
ANDREA BELEN VARGAS

2. 1.PRODUCT LIABILITY
TYPES OF TORTS: Negligence, Product liability and Intentional Tort.
Products Liability is a field of tort law which concerns the responsibility of the
manufacturer or vendor of a product to ensure that products are safe and
do not cause injury. Products subjected to liability include all consumer
goods, medical devices, commercial/personal vehicles, aircraft and
consumable goods such as food and prescription drugs. As it is the duty of a
product vendor or manufacturer to produce/supply a product which will
not cause harm during normal use, manufacturer/vendors of unsafe
products are subject to recovery for damages.

3. 2. INTENTIONAL TORT
Intentional Tort:
An intentional tort is a civil wrong resulting from an intentional act on the part of the
tortfeasor(alleged wrongdoer).
The term negligence, on the other hand, pertains to a tort that simply results from the
failure of the tortfeasor to take sufficient care in fulfilling a duty owed, while the term
"strict liability torts" refers to situations where a party is liable for injuries no matter
what precautions were taken.
The key difference between intentional torts and negligent torts is that the plaintiff must
prove the additional element that the defendant acted with the specific intent to
perform (i.e., acted with a mental state of intentionally performing) the act which was
the proximate cause of the plaintiff's injuries (so-called malice).

4. 3. NEGLIGENCE
Negligence:
There are certain elements that are required to prove that a defendant acted negligently.
Conduct means (obviously, since it is a cognate: it looks and means the same thing as a
word you already know (conducta)) "Behaviour".
There is a specific code of conduct which all people are expected to follow and there is a
duty of the public to act in a certain way, which reduces the risk of harm to others.
Negligence Proof- Proximate evidence and Circumstantial evidence.
Negligence can only be claimed by an injured plaintiff, whose interests have actually been
interfered with. A plaintiff must prove his injuries, and prove that they were caused by
the defendant. This proximate cause is the link between the defendant's actions and
the plaintiff's injuries

5. DAMAGES.
Since the purpose of tort law is to compensate the victim for harm actually done,
damages are usually measured by the extent of the injury. Expressed in money terms,
these include replacement of property destroyed, compensation for lost wages,
reimbursement for medical expenses, and dollars that are supposed to approximate
the pain that is suffered. Damages for these injuries are called compensatory
damages.
In certain instances, the courts will permit an award of punitive damages. As the
word punitiveimplies, the purpose is to punish the defendant’s actions. Because a
punitive award (sometimes called exemplary damages) is at odds with the general
purpose of tort law, it is allowable only in aggravated situations. The law in most
states permits recovery of punitive damages only when the defendant has
deliberately committed a wrong with malicious intent or has otherwise done
something outrageous.

6. DAMAGES.
Punitive damages are rarely allowed in negligence cases for that reason. But if someone
sets out intentionally and maliciously to hurt another person, punitive damages may
well be appropriate. Punitive damages are intended not only to punish the wrongdoer,
by exacting an additional and sometimes heavy payment (the exact amount is left to
the discretion of jury and judge), but also to deter others from similar conduct. The
punitive damage award has been subject to heavy criticism in recent years in cases in
which it has been awarded against manufacturers. One fear is that huge damage
awards on behalf of a multitude of victims could swiftly bankrupt the defendant.
Unlike compensatory damages, punitive damages are taxable.

7. https://courses.lumenlearning.com/masterybusinesslaw/chapter/introduction-to-tort-law/

8. Thanks!
Any questions?
You can find me at:
adelamperezdelviso
@gmail.com
8