law of trot conclusion

1. Unit 1
The word tort is derived from the Latin word tortum which means twisted or crooked or wrong and is in
contrast to the word rectum which means straight. ... In general terms, a tort may be defined as a civil wrong
independent of contract for which the appropriate remedy is an action for unliquidated damages.
Mens rea (/ˈmɛnz ˈriːə/; Latin for "guilty mind") is the mental element of a crime. ... Exceptions are known as
strict liability crimes. In civil law, it is usually not necessary to prove a subjective mental element to establish
liability for breach of contract or tort, for example.
Actual malice In the law of libel, the term means personal spite or ill-will, or culpable recklessness or
negligence.... Malice Aforethought In the law of homicide , the intention to kill, actual or implied , under
circumstances which do not constitute excuse or justification ; the intentional doing of an unlawful..
Ubi Jus Ibi Remedium Definition: Latin: For every wrong, the law provides a remedy. Related Terms: Equity.
An ambitious principle or maxim of Roman law now often used, and well known to the common law but also
part of the judicial arsenal in the Chancery courts (equity).

2. Definition of Tort
The term tort is the French equivalent of the English word ‘wrong’ and of the Roman
law term ‘delict’. The word tort is derived from the Latin word tortum which means
twisted or crooked or wrong and is in contrast to the word rectum which means
straight. Everyone is expected to behave in a straightforward manner and when one
deviates from this straight path into crooked ways he has committed a tort. Hence tort
is a conduct which is twisted or crooked and not straight. As a technical term of English
law, tort has acquired a special meaning as a species of civil injury or wrong. It was
introduced into the English law by the Norman jurists.
Tort now means a breach of some duty independent of contract giving rise to a civil
cause of action and for which compensation is recoverable. In spite of various
attempts an entirely satisfactory definition of tort still awaits its master. In general
terms, a tort may be defined as a civil wrong independent of contract for which the
appropriate remedy is an action for un liquidated damages. Some other definitions for
tort are given below:
Winfield and Jolowicz- Tortuous liability arises from the breach of a duty primarily
fixed by law; this duty is towards persons generally and its breach is redressible by an
action for un liquidated damages.

3. Ubi Jus Ibi Remedium is a Latin legal maxim which means "where
there is a right there is a remedy". The basic principle
contemplated in the maxim is that, when a person's right is
violated the victim will have an equitable remedy under law. The
maxim also states that the person whose right is being infringed
has a right to enforce the infringed right through any action
before a court. All law courts are also guided with the same
principle of Ubi Jus Ibi Remedium.

5. Unit 2
General defences Necessity If damage is caused to avoid a greater damage, it
becomes a good defence. Act in respect to Statutory Authority Any damage arising out
of an act that the law prescribes or the statute authorizes will never become
actionable even though in absence of such statutory authority it is an offence in tort.
Reasons for vicarious liability
Several reasons have been advanced as a justification for the imposition of vicarious liability:
(1) The master has the ‘deepest pockets’. The wealth of a defendant, or the fact that he has access to
resources via insurance, has in some cases had an unconscious influence on the development of legal
principles.
(2) Vicarious liability encourages accident prevention by giving an employer a financial interest in
encouraging his employees to take care for the safety of others.
(3) As the employer makes a profit from the activities of his employees, he should also bear any losses that
those activities cause.
Constituents Of Vicarious Liability
So the constituents of vicarious liability are:
(1) There must be a relationship of a certain kind.
(2) The wrongful act must be related to the relationship in a certain way.
(3) The wrong has been done within the course of employment.

6. • Vicarious liability refers to a situation where someone is held responsible
for the actions or omissions of another person. In a workplace context, an
employer can be liable for the acts or omissions of its employees, provided
it can be shown that they took place in the course of their employment.
• Generally, a person is liable for his own wrongful acts and one does not
incur any liability for the acts done by others. In certain cases, however,
vicarious liability, that is the liability of one person for the act of another
person, may arise. In order that the liability of A for the act done by B can
arise, it is necessary that there should be certain kind of relationship
between A and B, and the wrongful act should be, in certain way,
connected with that relationship.

7. unit 3
Tort of Negligence. A breach of duty or a failure of one party to exercise the standard of care required by
law, resulting in damage to the party to whom the duty was owed.
Nuisance in English law is an area of tort law broadly divided into two torts; privatenuisance, where the
actions of the defendant are "causing a substantial and unreasonable interference with a [claimant]'s
land or his use or enjoyment of that land", and public nuisance, where the defendant's actions
"materially ...
Absolute liability is a standard of legal liability found in tort and criminal law of various legal
jurisdictions. To be convicted of an ordinary crime, in certain jurisdictions, a person must not only have
committed a criminal action, but also have had a deliberate intention or guilty mind (mens rea).
The two principal remedies available to the victim of a tort are damages to compensate for the harm he
has suffered and, where appropriate, an injunction to prevent future harm. Damages is the predominant
remedy.
In English law, remoteness is a set of rules in both tort and contract, which limits the amount of
compensatory damages for a wrong. In negligence, the test of causation not only requires that the
defendant was the cause in fact, but also requires that the loss or damage sustained by the claimant was
not too remote.

8. prepared by
vishnu mohan m
9995638126