Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
Tort Law
What is a Tort?
• Tort is a Civil Wrong
• It arises from a “Snail in Bottle” and the case
of Donoghue v Stevenson [1932].
• In this case a guy took a female friend to a café
and bought her a ginger beer. She drank from
an opaque bottle and found a decomposed
snail which made her ill. She did not buy the
bottle and had no contract - thus she had no
claim in contract law.
Donoghue v Stevenson [1932]
• The case established that a manufacturer owes a duty
of care to a consumer - based upon three broad
principles.
• 1. That D (the defendant) owed a duty of care
to C (the claimant).
• 2. That D breached that duty; and
• 3. That C suffered damage as a result.
This was seen as a “neighbour principle” – in which D
owes a duty of care to their neighbour.
Applying that principle …
• If I buy a new TV - switch it on and it
explodes and damages my house the case of
Donoghue v Stevenson establishes the
manufacturers liability in Tort.
• What if I go to the canteen and buy a lemonade
in a clear bottle and drink from it to find a big
worm - is Donoghue binding, or can it be
distinguished?
• What is the relevance of Bourhill v
Young [1942] and the foreseeability of a
reasonable man?
• Proximity
Breach of Duty
• A defendant is only liable in Tort if he did not
act in the way that the ordinary reasonable
man would have done.
Categories:
– Direct loss – value of the loss of certain bodily functions
(e.g. loss of a leg)
– Economic loss – out-of-pocket costs resulting from the
injury (e.g. medical bills, lost wages, reduced earnings
capacity, property damage)
– Pain and suffering – value of the mental anguish plaintiff
has suffered and will continue to suffer
– There are others, but these are the main categories
Defenses to Negligence Suits
• As you know, it is rare that an accident is caused solely
because of one person’s actions
If the plaintiff is partly at fault for his or her injuries, what can the
defendant do to reduce his or her liability?
– Contributory negligence defense: If the plaintiff’s own
negligence contributed to the harm suffered, the plaintiff
cannot collect anything from the defendant
(This defense is only used in a few places)
– Comparative negligence defense: Plaintiff’s recovery from
the defendant is reduced by the percentage that the
plaintiff’s own negligence contributed to the injury
Comparative Negligence
What does this mean?
– Basically, even if the plaintiff was 90% responsible
for her own injuries, she may still recover 10% of
her damages from the defendant
– Example: Scratchy sues Itchy for $100,000 for
running him over as he crossed the street. The jury
determines that Scratchy was 30% responsible for
his own injuries because he was wearing all black
and listening to loud music. Scratchy will recover
$70,000 from Itchy
Summary
• The information covered today is just the tip of the iceberg