This is an accepted version of this page
163-574: In United States law , an organic act is an act of the United States Congress that establishes a territory of the United States and specifies how it is to be governed, or an agency to manage certain federal lands. In the absence of an organic law a territory is classified as unorganized . The first such act was the Northwest Ordinance , passed in 1787 by the U.S. Congress of
326-507: A botleas crime were at the king's mercy. Items or creatures which caused death were also destroyed as deodands . Alfred the Great 's Doom Book distinguished unintentional injuries from intentional ones, and defined culpability based on status, age, and gender. After the Norman Conquest , fines were paid only to courts or the king, and quickly became a revenue source. A wrong became known as
489-665: A direct result of the breach of duty . Legal injuries addressable under tort law in common law jurisdictions are not limited to physical injuries and may include emotional, economic, or reputational injuries as well as violations of privacy , property, or constitutional rights. Torts comprise such varied topics as automobile accidents , false imprisonment , defamation , product liability , copyright infringement , and environmental pollution ( toxic torts ). Modern torts are heavily affected by insurance and insurance law , as many cases are settled through claims adjustment rather than by trial, and are defended by insurance lawyers, with
652-401: A jury , and aggressive pretrial "law and motion" practice designed to result in a pretrial disposition (that is, summary judgment ) or a settlement. U.S. courts pioneered the concept of the opt-out class action , by which the burden falls on class members to notify the court that they do not wish to be bound by the judgment, as opposed to opt-in class actions, where class members must join into
815-503: A lawsuit . To prevail, the plaintiff in the lawsuit must generally show that the tortfeasor's actions or lack of action was the proximate cause of the harm, though the specific requirements vary between jurisdictions. Torts and crimes in common law originate in the Germanic system of compensatory fines for wrongs, with no clear distinction between crimes and other wrongs. In Anglo-Saxon law , most wrongs required payment in money paid to
978-437: A motion to compel discovery. In tort litigation, the availability of discovery enables plaintiffs to essentially carry out a private investigation, subpoenaing records and documents from the defendant. Consequently, commentators in civil law jurisdictions regard discovery destructive of the rule of law and as "a private inquisition." Civil law countries see the underlying objectives of discovery as properly monopolised by
1141-411: A tort or trespass , and there arose a division between civil pleas and pleas of the crown. The petty assizes (i.e. of novel disseisin , of mort d'ancestor , and of darrein presentment ) were established in 1166 as a remedy for interference with possession of freehold land. The trespass action was an early civil plea in which damages were paid to the victim; if no payment was made, the defendant
1304-542: A British classic or two, a famous old case, or a nod to Blackstone ; but current British law almost never gets any mention." Foreign law has never been cited as binding precedent, but as a reflection of the shared values of Anglo-American civilization or even Western civilization in general. Federal law originates with the Constitution, which gives Congress the power to enact statutes for certain limited purposes like regulating interstate commerce . The United States Code
1467-505: A breach of general obligations imposed by law and not by contract. This broad family of civil wrongs involves interference "with person, property, reputation, or commercial or social advantage." Tort A tort is a civil wrong , other than breach of contract, that causes a claimant to suffer loss or harm, resulting in legal liability for the person who commits the tortious act. Tort law can be contrasted with criminal law , which deals with criminal wrongs that are punishable by
1630-516: A case falls into one of three sets of circumstances recognised by precedent while the Singaporean test is independent of precedent. In English tort law, Caparo Industries plc v Dickman established a tripartite test for the existence of a duty of care per which harm must be reasonably foreseeable as a potential result of the defendant's conduct; the parties must be in a relationship of proximity; and it must be fair, just, and reasonable to impose such
1793-452: A court as persuasive authority as to how a particular statute or regulation may be interpreted (known as Skidmore deference), but are not entitled to Chevron deference. Unlike the situation with the states, there is no plenary reception statute at the federal level that continued the common law and thereby granted federal courts the power to formulate legal precedent like their English predecessors. Federal courts are solely creatures of
SECTION 10
#17328443668771956-489: A court order providing for a remedy other than damages is awarded under the CDRA is violated, sections 5-8 of the act require that the plaintiff apply for a 'special direction' to be issued in order to enforce the original remedy and section 9 provides that failure to comply with a special direction is grounds for the court to issue an order excluding the tortfeasor from their residence. Aside from legislatively created remedies such as
2119-747: A dangerous escape of some hazard, including water, fire, or animals as long as the cause was not remote. In Cambridge Water Co Ltd v Eastern Counties Leather plc (1994), chemicals from a factory seeped through a floor into the water table, contaminating East Anglia's water reservoirs. The Rylands rule remains in use in England and Wales. In Australian law, it has been merged into negligence. Economic torts typically involve commercial transactions, and include tortious interference with trade or contract, fraud, injurious falsehood, and negligent misrepresentation. Negligent misrepresentation torts are distinct from contractual cases involving misrepresentation in that there
2282-505: A defendant may assert various defences to a plaintiff's case, including comparative fault and assumption of risk. Negligence is a tort which arises from the breach of the duty of care owed by one person to another from the perspective of a reasonable person . Although credited as appearing in the United States in Brown v. Kendall , the later Scottish case of Donoghue v Stevenson [1932] AC 562, followed in England, brought England into line with
2445-474: A defender intentionally harms the pursuer - provided the interest harmed is regarded as reparable - the defender incurs delictual liability'. If the pursuer has suffered loss as the result of the defender's conduct, yet the defender did not intend to harm the pursuer, nor behave so recklessly that intent might be constructively inferred, the pursuer must demonstrate that the defender's conduct was negligent in order to win their case. Negligence can be established, by
2608-431: A duty that arises from a contract. Obligations in both tort and criminal law are more fundamental and are imposed regardless of whether the parties have a contract. While tort law in civil law jurisdictions largely derives from Roman law , common law jurisdictions derive their tort law from customary English tort law . In civil law jurisdictions based on civil codes, both contractual and tortious or delictual liability
2771-421: A duty. Intentional torts are any intentional acts that are reasonably foreseeable to cause harm to an individual, and that do so. Intentional torts have several subcategories: An intentional tort requires an overt act, some form of intent, and causation. In most cases, transferred intent, which occurs when the defendant intends to injure an individual but actually ends up injuring another individual, will satisfy
2934-566: A final version is published in the Federal Register. The regulations are codified and incorporated into the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) which is published once a year on a rolling schedule. Besides regulations formally promulgated under the APA, federal agencies also frequently promulgate an enormous amount of forms, manuals, policy statements, letters, and rulings. These documents may be considered by
3097-585: A handful of areas like insurance , Congress has enacted laws expressly refusing to regulate them as long as the states have laws regulating them (see, e.g., the McCarran–Ferguson Act ). After the president signs a bill into law (or Congress enacts it over the president's veto), it is delivered to the Office of the Federal Register (OFR) of the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) where it
3260-438: A legislative branch which enacts state statutes, an executive branch that promulgates state regulations pursuant to statutory authorization, and a judicial branch that applies, interprets, and occasionally overturns both state statutes and regulations, as well as local ordinances. They retain plenary power to make laws covering anything not preempted by the federal Constitution, federal statutes, or international treaties ratified by
3423-426: A lesser form of judicial deference known as Skidmore deference . Many lawsuits turn on the meaning of a federal statute or regulation, and judicial interpretations of such meaning carry legal force under the principle of stare decisis . During the 18th and 19th centuries, federal law traditionally focused on areas where there was an express grant of power to the federal government in the federal Constitution, like
SECTION 20
#17328443668773586-409: A matter of fundamental fairness, and second, because in the absence of case law, it would be completely unworkable for every minor issue in every legal case to be briefed, argued, and decided from first principles (such as relevant statutes, constitutional provisions, and underlying public policies), which in turn would create hopeless inefficiency, instability, and unpredictability, and thereby undermine
3749-415: A medical issue and others categorizing the same offense as a serious felony . The law of criminal procedure in the United States consists of a massive overlay of federal constitutional case law interwoven with the federal and state statutes that actually provide the foundation for the creation and operation of law enforcement agencies and prison systems as well as the proceedings in criminal trials. Due to
3912-504: A mixture of common and civil law jurisprudence either due to their colonial past (e.g. Québec , St Lucia , Mauritius ) or due to influence from multiple legal traditions when their civil codes were drafted (e.g. Mainland China , the Philippines , and Thailand ). Furthermore, Israel essentially codifies common law provisions on tort. In common, civil, and mixed law jurisdictions alike, the main remedy available to plaintiffs under tort law
4075-466: A patrimonial interest, they will incur Aquilian liability; and, where an individual violates a non-patrimonial interest, they will incur liability stemming from the actio iniuriarum. While broadly similar due to their common origin, the nature of the remedies available under contemporary Scots and Roman-Dutch law vary slightly, although the aquilian action and actio iniuriarum are the primary remedies available under both systems. The primary difference between
4238-634: A reaction in terms of tort reform , which in some cases have been struck down as violating state constitutions, and federal preemption of state laws. Torts may be categorised in several ways, with a particularly common division between negligent and intentional torts. Quasi-torts are unusual tort actions. Particularly in the United States, "collateral tort" is used to refer to torts in labour law such as intentional infliction of emotional distress ("outrage"); or wrongful dismissal ; these evolving causes of action are debated and overlap with contract law or other legal areas to some degree. In some cases,
4401-624: A result of the influence of its relatively early codification of criminal law, the torts of assault, battery, and false imprisonment are interpreted by Indian courts and the courts of jurisdictions that were formerly part of the British Indian Empire (e.g. Pakistan, Bangladesh) and British colonies in South East Asia which adopted the Indian Penal Code (i.e. Singapore, Malaysia, and Brunei) with reference to analogous crimes outlined in
4564-464: A separate category of strict liability torts. Similarly, cases involving environmental or consumer health torts which other countries treat as negligence or strict liability torts are treated in India as absolute liability torts. In establishing whether a duty of care exists, different common law jurisdictions have developed a variety of distinct but related approaches, with many jurisdictions building on
4727-467: A similar test in the context of assessing damages for pure economic loss owing to negligence derived from Anns which consists of a two step examination of the existence of a sufficiently proximate relationship between the parties and public policy considerations; however, the Canadian test is more sensitive to the individual circumstances of a given case and the first step is generally deemed to be met where
4890-625: A small number of important British statutes in effect at the time of the Revolution have been independently reenacted by U.S. states. Two examples are the Statute of Frauds (still widely known in the U.S. by that name) and the Statute of 13 Elizabeth (the ancestor of the Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act). Such English statutes are still regularly cited in contemporary American cases interpreting their modern American descendants. Despite
5053-522: A subsequent statute. Many federal and state statutes have remained on the books for decades after they were ruled to be unconstitutional. However, under the principle of stare decisis , a lower court that enforces an unconstitutional statute will be reversed by the Supreme Court. Conversely, any court that refuses to enforce a constitutional statute will risk reversal by the Supreme Court. The United States and most Commonwealth countries are heirs to
Organic act - Misplaced Pages Continue
5216-430: A threat by a third party or an outside force. Private defence (or self-defence) is conduct directed at the person responsible for the duress or compulsion or threat. There is, therefore, an important distinction between the two. In cases of necessity and private defence, the question is this: Under which circumstances would the legal convictions of the community consider it reasonable to inflict harm to prevent it? The test
5379-750: A tort claim are able to do so in the hope that they will be able to obtain sufficient evidence through discovery. The primary drawbacks of this are that, on one hand, it creates the possibility that a plaintiff filing suit in good faith may not find enough evidence to succeed and incur legal expenses driven upward due to the cost of discovery; and, on the other hand, that it enables plaintiffs arguing in bad faith to initiate frivolous tort lawsuits and coerce defendants into agreeing to legal settlements in otherwise unmeritorious actions. Among common law countries today, there are significant differences in tort law. Common law systems include United States tort law , Australian tort law , Canadian tort law , Indian tort law , and
5542-400: A willingness to reconsider others. And that willingness could itself threaten to substitute disruption, confusion, and uncertainty for necessary legal stability. We have not found here any factors that might overcome these considerations. It is now sometimes possible, over time, for a line of precedents to drift from the express language of any underlying statutory or constitutional texts until
5705-427: A year or less in jail and a substantial fine. To simplify the prosecution of traffic violations and other relatively minor crimes, some states have added a third level, infractions . These may result in fines and sometimes the loss of one's driver's license, but no jail time. On average, only three percent of criminal cases are resolved by jury trial; 97 percent are terminated either by plea bargaining or dismissal of
5868-441: Is no general federal common law . Although federal courts can create federal common law in the form of case law, such law must be linked one way or another to the interpretation of a particular federal constitutional provision, statute, or regulation (which was either enacted as part of the Constitution or pursuant to constitutional authority). Federal courts lack the plenary power possessed by state courts to simply make up law, which
6031-513: Is assigned a law number, and prepared for publication as a slip law . Public laws, but not private laws, are also given legal statutory citation by the OFR. At the end of each session of Congress, the slip laws are compiled into bound volumes called the United States Statutes at Large , and they are known as session laws . The Statutes at Large present a chronological arrangement of the laws in
6194-515: Is compensation in damages , or money. Further, in the case of a continuing tort, or even where harm is merely threatened, the courts will sometimes grant an injunction , such as in the English case of Miller v Jackson . Usually injunctions will not impose positive obligations on tortfeasors , but some jurisdictions, such as those in Australia , can make an order for specific performance to ensure that
6357-455: Is considerable academic debate about whether vicarious liability is justified on no better basis than the search for a solvent defendant, or whether it is well founded on the theory of efficient risk allocation. Absolute liability , under the rule in M. C. Mehta v. Union of India , in Indian tort law is a unique outgrowth of the doctrine of strict liability for ultrahazardous activities . Under
6520-433: Is currently no consistent approach to the tort of invasion of privacy. Four provinces (British Columbia, Manitoba, Newfoundland and Saskatchewan ) have created a statutory tort. Ontario has recognised the existence of the tort of " intrusion upon seclusion ", which has also been held to exist under tort law in the United States. British Columbia, on the other hand, has held that the tort does not exist in that province under
6683-503: Is implicit" in Article 21 of the Constitution of India , which guarantees protections for personal liberties. Despite the lack of a tort addressing violations of privacy by private individuals, the Supreme Court recognised privacy as a constitutional right in 2017. Similarly, neither intentional infliction of emotional distress (IIED) nor negligent infliction of emotional distress (NIED)
Organic act - Misplaced Pages Continue
6846-404: Is no privity of contract; these torts are likely to involve pure economic loss which has been less-commonly recoverable in tort. One criterion for determining whether economic loss is recoverable is the "foreseeability" doctrine. The economic loss rule is highly confusing and inconsistently applied and began in 1965 from a California case involving strict liability for product defects; in 1986,
7009-669: Is no exhaustive list of named delicts in either system; if the conduct complained of appears to be wrongful, the law will afford a remedy even in the absence of precedent pertaining to similar conduct. In South Africa and neighbouring countries, the Roman-Dutch law of delict is in force, having been preserved after the United Kingdom annexed Dutch settlements in South Africa and spread as neighbouring British colonies adopted South African law via reception statutes . Roman-Dutch law also forms
7172-462: Is not repugnant to domestic law or indigenous conditions. Some reception statutes impose a specific cutoff date for reception, such as the date of a colony's founding, while others are deliberately vague. Thus, contemporary U.S. courts often cite pre-Revolution cases when discussing the evolution of an ancient judge-made common law principle into its modern form, such as the heightened duty of care traditionally imposed upon common carriers . Second,
7335-672: Is objective. It requires a balancing of the parties' and of society's interests. The role of the person against whom the defensive conduct is directed is an important factor in determining whether defence or necessity is being pled. An act of necessity is calculated to avert harm by inflicting it on an innocent person, whereas an act of defence is always directed at a wrongdoer. A person acts in "private defence", and therefore lawfully, when he uses force to ward off an unlawful attack against his or someone else's property or person. A person acts in "self-defence" when he defends his own body against unlawful attack by someone else. One therefore cannot invoke
7498-423: Is permitted in some states but not others. Three strikes laws in certain states impose harsh penalties on repeat offenders. Some states distinguish between two levels: felonies and misdemeanors (minor crimes). Generally, most felony convictions result in lengthy prison sentences as well as subsequent probation , large fines , and orders to pay restitution directly to victims; while misdemeanors may lead to
7661-486: Is recognised as a tort in Indian jurisprudence. While claims seeking damages for infliction of emotional distress were historically an accessory claim in a tort action alleging another distinct tort, the doctrine has evolved in North America into a stand-alone tort while English jurisprudence has evolved to typically recognise only recognised psychiatric injuries as grounds for compensation. Indian courts, while recognising
7824-474: Is required to compensate them for any resulting injury, and provides for strict liability where such harm is caused by the violation of a statutory provision aimed at protecting members of the community from harm. Additionally, tort liability exists for the owner of a defective building or structure where such building or structure causes damage, for the driver of an automobile that causes injury, and for individual's responsible for business activities that posed
7987-456: Is the most prominent of the small number of remaining equity courts. Thirty-five states have adopted rules of civil procedure modeled after the FRCP (including rule numbers). However, in doing so, they had to make some modifications to account for the fact that state courts have broad general jurisdiction while federal courts have relatively limited jurisdiction. New York, Illinois, and California are
8150-467: Is the nation's Constitution , which prescribes the foundation of the federal government of the United States, as well as various civil liberties . The Constitution sets out the boundaries of federal law, which consists of Acts of Congress , treaties ratified by the Senate , regulations promulgated by the executive branch , and case law originating from the federal judiciary . The United States Code
8313-402: Is the official compilation and codification of general and permanent federal statutory law. The Constitution provides that it, as well as federal laws and treaties that are made pursuant to it, preempt conflicting state and territorial laws in the 50 U.S. states and in the territories. However, the scope of federal preemption is limited because the scope of federal power is not universal. In
SECTION 50
#17328443668778476-554: Is the official compilation and codification of the general and permanent federal statutes. Many statutes give executive branch agencies the power to create regulations , which are published in the Federal Register and codified into the Code of Federal Regulations . From 1984 to 2024, regulations generally also carried the force of law under the Chevron doctrine , but are now subject only to
8639-451: Is the toleration of the use of reasonable force to expel a trespasser, which is typically also a defence against the tort of battery. In some, but not all, civil and mixed law jurisdictions, the term delict is used to refer to this category of civil wrong, though it can also refer to criminal offences. Other jurisdictions may use terms such as extracontractual responsibility (France) or civil responsibility (Québec). In comparative law ,
8802-505: Is typically outlined in a civil code based on Roman Law principles. Tort law is referred to as the law of delict in Scots and Roman Dutch law , and resembles tort law in common law jurisdictions in that rules regarding civil liability are established primarily by precedent and theory rather than an exhaustive code. However, like other civil law jurisdictions, the underlying principles are drawn from Roman law. A handful of jurisdictions have codified
8965-502: Is typically the default remedy available to plaintiffs, with injunctions and specific performance being relatively rare in tort law cases. Relatively uniquely for a common law jurisdiction, Singapore's Community Disputes Resolution Act 2015 (CDRA) alters the common law by codifying a statutory tort of "interference with enjoyment or use of place of residence" and provides for a variety of remedies beyond damages, ranging from injunctions and specific performance to court-ordered apologies. Where
9128-414: Is used to impose strict liability on certain areas of nuisance law and is strictly "a remedy for damage to land or interests in land" under which "damages for personal injuries are not recoverable", Indian courts have developed this rule into a distinct principle of absolute liability, where an enterprise is absolutely liable, without exceptions, to compensate everyone affected by any accident resulting from
9291-540: Is usually expressed in the form of various legal rights and duties). (The remainder of this article requires the reader to be already familiar with the contents of the separate article on state law .) Criminal law involves the prosecution by the state of wrongful acts which are considered to be so serious that they are a breach of the sovereign's peace (and cannot be deterred or remedied by mere lawsuits between private parties). Generally, crimes can result in incarceration , but torts (see below) cannot. The majority of
9454-610: The California constitutional convention was already complaining: "Now, when we require them to state the reasons for a decision, we do not mean they shall write a hundred pages of detail. We [do] not mean that they shall include the small cases, and impose on the country all this fine judicial literature, for the Lord knows we have got enough of that already." Today, in the words of Stanford law professor Lawrence M. Friedman : "American cases rarely cite foreign materials. Courts occasionally cite
9617-495: The Court of the King's Bench is recorded as saying that since the water supply in area was already contaminated, the nuisance was not actionable as it is "better that they should be spoiled than that the commonwealth stand in need of good liquor". In English law, a related category of tort liability was created in the case of Rylands v Fletcher (1868): strict liability was established for
9780-448: The Erie doctrine is that federal courts cannot dictate the content of state law when there is no federal issue (and thus no federal supremacy issue) in a case. When hearing claims under state law pursuant to diversity jurisdiction , federal trial courts must apply the statutory and decisional law of the state in which they sit, as if they were a court of that state, even if they believe that
9943-476: The Federal Arbitration Act (which has been interpreted to cover all contracts arising under federal or state law), arbitration clauses are generally enforceable unless the party resisting arbitration can show unconscionability or fraud or something else which undermines the entire contract. Tort law generally covers any civil action between private parties arising from wrongful acts that amount to
SECTION 60
#173284436687710106-477: The Judiciary Acts ), and the beginning of regular verbatim publication of U.S. appellate decisions by West Publishing . The rule gradually developed, case-by-case, as an extension of the judiciary's public policy of effective judicial administration (that is, in order to efficiently exercise the judicial power). The rule of binding precedent is generally justified today as a matter of public policy, first, as
10269-598: The Netherlands and Scotland during the Enlightenment . In both legal systems, when applied in English speaking countries, the term delict is used to refer to tortious liability (unlike, for instance, in Spain where the cognate of the term delict refers to a criminal offence). Unlike in systems based on civil codes or on the English common law, Scots and Roman-Dutch law operate on broad principles of liability for wrongdoing; there
10432-607: The Ultramares approach or the Restatement approach. The tort of deceit for inducement into a contract is a tort in English law, but in practice has been replaced by actions under Misrepresentation Act 1967 . In the United States, similar torts existed but have become superseded to some degree by contract law and the pure economic loss rule. Historically (and to some degree today), fraudulent (but not negligent ) misrepresentation involving damages for economic loss may be awarded under
10595-417: The defendant carries out certain legal obligations, especially in relation to nuisance matters. At the same time, each legal system provides for a variety of defences for defendants in tort claims which, partially or fully, shield defendants from liability. In a limited range of cases varying between jurisdictions, tort law will tolerate self-help as an appropriate remedy for certain torts. One example of this
10758-420: The insurance policy setting a ceiling on the possible payment. While individuals and corporations are typically only liable for their own actions, indirect liability for the tortious acts of others may arise by operation of law, notably through joint and several liability doctrines as well as forms of secondary liability . Liability may arise through enterprise liability or, in product liability cases in
10921-416: The lex Aquilia' and wrongdoing that results in physical harm to a person may give rise to both an aquilian action and an actio iniuriarum. Additionally, the modern Scots law pertaining to reparation for negligent wrongdoing is based on the lex Aquilia and so affords reparation in instances of damnum injuria datum - literally loss wrongfully caused - with the wrongdoing in such instances generated by
11084-533: The military , money , foreign relations (especially international treaties), tariffs , intellectual property (specifically patents and copyrights ), and mail . Since the start of the 20th century, broad interpretations of the Commerce and Spending Clauses of the Constitution have enabled federal law to expand into areas like aviation , telecommunications , railroads , pharmaceuticals , antitrust , and trademarks . In some areas, like aviation and railroads,
11247-447: The rule of law . The contemporary form of the rule is descended from Justice Louis Brandeis 's "landmark dissent in 1932's Burnet v. Coronado Oil & Gas Co .", which "catalogued the Court's actual overruling practices in such a powerful manner that his attendant stare decisis analysis immediately assumed canonical authority." Here is a typical exposition of how public policy supports
11410-412: The "appeal of felony", or assize of novel disseisin, or replevin . Later, after the Statute of Westminster 1285 , in the 1360s, the "trespass on the case" action arose for when the defendant did not direct force. As its scope increased, it became simply "action on the case". The English Judicature Act passed 1873 through 1875 abolished the separate actions of trespass and trespass on the case. In 1401,
11573-502: The "benefit-of-the-bargain" rule (damages identical to expectation damages in contracts ) which awards the plaintiff the difference between the value represented and the actual value. Beginning with Stiles v. White (1846) in Massachusetts, this rule spread across the country as a majority rule with the "out-of-pocket damages" rule as a minority rule. Although the damages under the "benefit-of-the-bargain" are described as compensatory,
11736-405: The CDRA, courts in common law jurisdictions will typically provide for damages (which, depending on jurisdiction, may include punitive damages ), but judges will issue injunctions and specific performance where they deem damages not to be a sufficient remedy. Legislatures in various common law jurisdictions have curtailed the ability of judges to award punitive or other non-economic damages through
11899-690: The Confederation (under the Articles of Confederation , predecessor of the United States Constitution ). The Northwest Ordinance created the Northwest Territory in the land west of Pennsylvania and northwest of the Ohio River and set the pattern of development that was followed for all subsequent territories. The Northwest Territory covered more than 260,000 square miles and included all of
12062-466: The English case Beaulieu v Finglam imposed strict liability for the escape of fire; additionally, strict liability was imposed for the release of cattle. Negligently handling fire was of particular importance in these societies given capacity for destruction and relatively limited firefighting resources. Liability for common carrier , which arose around 1400, was also emphasised in the medieval period. Unintentional injuries were relatively infrequent in
12225-521: The Roman Lex Aquilia . Non-patrimonial interests include dignitary and personality related interests (e.g. defamation, disfigurement, unjust imprisonment) which cannot be exhaustively listed which are addressed in the context of the Roman Actio iniuriarum , as well as pain and suffering which are addressed under jurisprudence that has developed in modern times. In general; where an individual violates
12388-451: The Scots and Roman-Dutch law of delict, there are two main remedies available to plaintiffs: Protected interests which can give rise to delictual liability can be broadly divided into two categories: patrimonial and non-patrimonial interests. Patrimonial interests are those which pertain to damages to an individual's body or property, which both Scots and Roman-Dutch law approach in the context of
12551-545: The U.S. Supreme Court adopted the doctrine in East River S.S. Corp. v. Transamerica Deleval, Inc . In 2010, the supreme court of the U.S. state of Washington replaced the economic loss doctrine with an "independent duty doctrine". Economic antitrust torts have been somewhat submerged by modern competition law . However, in the United States, private parties are permitted in certain circumstances to sue for anticompetitive practices, including under federal or state statutes or on
12714-402: The United Kingdom lacked a coherent court hierarchy prior to the end of the 19th century. Furthermore, English judges in the eighteenth century subscribed to now-obsolete natural law theories of law, by which law was believed to have an existence independent of what individual judges said. Judges saw themselves as merely declaring the law which had always theoretically existed, and not as making
12877-449: The United States and established the 'tort of negligence' as opposed to negligence as a component in specific actions. In Donoghue , Mrs. Donoghue drank from an opaque bottle containing a decomposed snail and claimed that it had made her ill. She could not sue Mr. Stevenson for damages for breach of contract and instead sued for negligence. The majority determined that the definition of negligence can be divided into four component parts that
13040-405: The United States, market share liability . In certain cases, a person might hold vicarious liability for their employee or child under the law of agency through the doctrine of respondeat superior . For example, if a shop employee spilled cleaning liquid on the supermarket floor and a victim fell and suffered injuries, the plaintiff might be able to sue either the employee or the employer. There
13203-422: The United States, noting that the English law was less generous to the plaintiff in the following ways: contingent fee arrangements were restricted, English judges tried more decisions and set damages rather than juries, wrongful death lawsuits were relatively restricted, punitive damages were relatively unavailable, the collateral source rule was restricted, and strict liability, such as for product liability,
13366-479: The United States, the law is derived from five sources: constitutional law , statutory law , treaties, administrative regulations , and the common law (which includes case law). If Congress enacts a statute that conflicts with the Constitution, state or federal courts may rule that law to be unconstitutional and declare it invalid. Notably, a statute does not automatically disappear merely because it has been found unconstitutional; it may, however, be deleted by
13529-577: The act organized New Mexico as a territory, with boundaries including the areas now embraced in New Mexico, Arizona, and southern Colorado. Territorial organic acts have included (in chronological order): The Philippines : Others: Law of the United States The law of the United States comprises many levels of codified and uncodified forms of law , of which the supreme law
13692-427: The actio iniuriarum. The various delictual actions are not mutually exclusive. It is possible for a person to suffer various forms of harm at the same time, which means that a person may simultaneously claim remedies under more than one action. The elements of liability under the actio iniuriarum are as follows: There are five essential elements for liability in terms of the actio legis Aquiliae : In Scots law,
13855-413: The actual "living law" of contract , tort , property , probate , criminal and family law , experienced by citizens on a day-to-day basis) consists primarily of state law , which, while sometimes harmonized, can and does vary greatly from one state to the next. Even in areas governed by federal law, state law is often supplemented, rather than preempted. At both the federal and state levels, with
14018-412: The aquilian action has developed more expansively and may be invoked as a remedy for both patrimonial and certain types of non-patrimonial loss, particularly with regard to personal injury. By way of a legal fiction , 'personal injury' is treated as (physical) 'damage done', with the net effect that 'the actio injuriarum root of Scots law infuses the [nominate] delict assault as much as any development of
14181-406: The average American citizen is subject to the rules and regulations of several dozen different agencies at the federal, state, and local levels, depending upon one's current location and behavior. American lawyers draw a fundamental distinction between procedural law (which controls the procedure by which legal rights and duties are vindicated) and substantive law (the actual substance of law, which
14344-419: The basis for the legal system of Sri Lanka . The elements of a delict as follows: The elements of harm and conduct are fact-based inquiries, while causation is part-factual and part-normative, and wrongfulness and fault are entirely normative: that is, value-based, in that they articulate a wider societal policy perspective. Delict is "inherently a flexible set of principles that embody social policy." Under
14507-658: The basis of common law tortious interference , which may be based upon the Restatement (Second) of Torts §766. Negligent misrepresentation as tort where no contractual privity exists was disallowed in England by Derry v Peek [1889]; however, this position was overturned in Hedley Byrne v Heller in 1964 so that such actions were allowed if a "special relationship" existed between the plaintiff and defendant. United States courts and scholars "paid lip-service" to Derry ; however, scholars such as William Prosser argued that it
14670-405: The charges. For public welfare offenses where the state is punishing merely risky (as opposed to injurious) behavior, there is significant diversity across the various states. For example, punishments for drunk driving varied greatly prior to 1990. State laws dealing with drug crimes still vary widely, with some states treating possession of small amounts of drugs as a misdemeanor offense or as
14833-467: The class. Another unique feature is the so-called American Rule under which parties generally bear their own attorneys' fees (as opposed to the English Rule of "loser pays"), though American legislators and courts have carved out numerous exceptions. Contract law covers obligations established by agreement (express or implied) between private parties. Generally, contract law in transactions involving
14996-519: The code. For instance, assault is interpreted in the context of s.351 per which the following criteria constitute assault: Similarly, battery is interpreted in the context of criminal force as outlined in s.350. An area of tort unique to India is the constitutional tort, a public law remedy for violations of rights, generally by agents of the state, and is implicitly premised on the strict liability principle. In practice, constitutional torts in India serve
15159-405: The common law legal tradition of English law. Certain practices traditionally allowed under English common law were expressly outlawed by the Constitution, such as bills of attainder and general search warrants. As common law courts, U.S. courts have inherited the principle of stare decisis . American judges, like common law judges elsewhere, not only apply the law, they also make the law, to
15322-470: The common law. Like the United Kingdom and British Columbia, but unlike Ontario and most jurisdictions in the United States, Indian tort law does not traditionally recognise a common law tort of invasion of privacy or intrusion on seclusion . Nevertheless, there is a shift in jurisprudence toward recognising breech of confidentiality as an actionable civil wrong. Proponents of protection for privacy under Indian tort law argue that "the right to privacy
15485-568: The court ordered double the original grain restored to the victim to compensate the damages. The Qin Code made some changes to tort liabilities introducing the concept of subjective fault ( fault liability ). In a case where one person borrows farm equipment, compensation would be required for damage to the equipment if the damage is caused by the condition of the equipment when it was borrowed. In addition to fault liability, some defences were developed. A person would not be liable if public property were damaged by fire or other natural forces outside
15648-456: The courts' decisions establish doctrines that were not considered by the texts' drafters. This trend has been strongly evident in federal substantive due process and Commerce Clause decisions. Originalists and political conservatives, such as Associate Justice Antonin Scalia have criticized this trend as anti-democratic. Under the doctrine of Erie Railroad Co. v. Tompkins (1938), there
15811-542: The crimes committed in the United States are prosecuted and punished at the state level. Federal criminal law focuses on areas specifically relevant to the federal government like evading payment of federal income tax, mail theft, or physical attacks on federal officials, as well as interstate crimes like drug trafficking and wire fraud. All states have somewhat similar laws in regard to "higher crimes" (or felonies ), such as murder and rape , although penalties for these crimes may vary from state to state. Capital punishment
15974-567: The defender's culpa (i.e., fault). In any instance in which a pursuer (A) has suffered loss at the hands of the wrongful conduct of the defender (B), B is under a legal obligation to make reparation . If B's wrongdoing were intentional in the circumstances, or so reckless that an 'intention' may be constructively inferred (on the basis that culpa lata dolo aequiparatur - 'gross fault is the same as intentional wrongdoing'), then it follows axiomatically that B will be liable to repair any damage done to A's property, person or economic interest: 'wherever
16137-605: The development of the Accident Compensation Corporation to eliminate personal injury lawsuits, the tort system for medical malpractice was scrapped in New Zealand, both following recommendations from the Royal Commission in 1967 for 'no fault' compensation scheme (see The Woodhouse Report). In the case of the United States, a survey of trial lawyers identified several modern innovations that developed after
16300-412: The development of tort law has spurred lawmakers to create alternative solutions to disputes. For example, in some areas, workers' compensation laws arose as a legislative response to court rulings restricting the extent to which employees could sue their employers in respect of injuries sustained during employment. In other cases, legal commentary has led to the development of new causes of action outside
16463-405: The divergence of English and American tort law, including strict liability for products based on Greenman v. Yuba Power Products , the limitation of various immunities (e.g. sovereign immunity , charitable immunity ), comparative negligence , broader rules for admitting evidence, increased damages for emotional distress , and toxic torts and class action lawsuits. However, there has also been
16626-488: The dual sovereign system of American federalism (actually tripartite because of the presence of Indian reservations ), states are the plenary sovereigns , each with their own constitution , while the federal sovereign possesses only the limited supreme authority enumerated in the Constitution. Indeed, states may grant their citizens broader rights than the federal Constitution as long as they do not infringe on any federal constitutional rights. Thus U.S. law (especially
16789-592: The exact order that they have been enacted. Public laws are incorporated into the United States Code , which is a codification of all general and permanent laws of the United States. The main edition is published every six years by the Office of the Law Revision Counsel of the House of Representatives , and cumulative supplements are published annually. The U.S. Code is arranged by subject matter, and it shows
16952-534: The exception of the legal system of Louisiana , the law of the United States is largely derived from the common law system of English law , which was in force in British America at the time of the American Revolutionary War . However, American law has diverged greatly from its English ancestor both in terms of substance and procedure and has incorporated a number of civil law innovations. In
17115-412: The extent that their decisions in the cases before them become precedent for decisions in future cases. The actual substance of English law was formally "received" into the United States in several ways. First, all U.S. states except Louisiana have enacted " reception statutes " which generally state that the common law of England (particularly judge-made law) is the law of the state to the extent that it
17278-581: The federal Constitution and the federal Judiciary Acts. However, it is universally accepted that the Founding Fathers of the United States , by vesting "judicial power" into the Supreme Court and the inferior federal courts in Article Three of the United States Constitution , thereby vested in them the implied judicial power of common law courts to formulate persuasive precedent ; this power
17441-450: The federal Senate. Normally, state supreme courts are the final interpreters of state constitutions and state law, unless their interpretation itself presents a federal issue, in which case a decision may be appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court by way of a petition for writ of certiorari . State laws have dramatically diverged in the centuries since independence, to the extent that the United States cannot be regarded as one legal system as to
17604-439: The federal government has developed a comprehensive scheme that preempts virtually all state law, while in others, like family law, a relatively small number of federal statutes (generally covering interstate and international situations) interacts with a much larger body of state law. In areas like antitrust, trademark, and employment law , there are powerful laws at both the federal and state levels that coexist with each other. In
17767-419: The fundamental criterion of reasonableness. They are another expression of the legal convictions of the society. Consent to injury, or Volenti non fit injuria , is a full defence; if successful, there is no delict. As a general defence, it can take two forms: There are five requirements for the defence of consent: Necessity is conduct directed at an innocent person as a result of duress or compulsion, or
17930-484: The government that infringe upon rights enshrined in the Constitution , as well as a system of absolute liability for businesses engaged in hazardous activity as outlined in the rule in M. C. Mehta v. Union of India . Similar to other common law jurisdictions, conduct which gives rise to a cause of action under tort law is additionally criminalised by the Indian Penal Code , which was originally enacted in 1860. As
18093-546: The history of torts has been critically reviewed. The 1928 US case of Palsgraf v. Long Island Railroad Co. heavily influenced the British judges in the 1932 House of Lords case of Donoghue v Stevenson . The United States has since been perceived as particularly prone to filing tort lawsuits even relative to other common law countries, although this perception has been criticised and debated. 20th century academics have identified that class actions were relatively uncommon outside of
18256-470: The infliction of emotional distress regardless of intention as an actionable wrong in matrimonial disputes, typically follow the English approach, although case law from both the United Kingdom and North America is frequently employed by judges ruling on cases in which damages for mental distress are sought. Both Scots and Roman-Dutch law are uncodified , scholarship -driven, and judge-made legal systems based on Roman law as historically applied in
18419-495: The intent requirement. Causation can be satisfied as long as the defendant was a substantial factor in causing the harm. "Nuisance" is traditionally used to describe an activity which is harmful or annoying to others such as indecent conduct or a rubbish heap. Nuisances either affect private individuals (private nuisance) or the general public (public nuisance). The claimant can sue for most acts that interfere with their use and enjoyment of their land. In English law, whether activity
18582-409: The issue, but has signaled in dicta that it sides with this rule. Therefore, in those states, there is only one federal court that binds all state courts as to the interpretation of federal law and the federal Constitution: the U.S. Supreme Court itself. The fifty American states are separate sovereigns , with their own state constitutions , state governments , and state courts . All states have
18745-468: The justification of self-defence when acting in the interests of another person, but it is possible to invoke the justification of private defence when acting in one's own interests. Conduct will be justified as an act in private defence or self-defence if it is The violence used in defence must not exceed what is reasonably necessary to avert the threatened danger: An act of necessity may be described as lawful conduct directed against an innocent person for
18908-433: The latter are able to do in the absence of constitutional or statutory provisions replacing the common law. Only in a few narrow limited areas, like maritime law, has the Constitution expressly authorized the continuation of English common law at the federal level (meaning that in those areas federal courts can continue to make law as they see fit, subject to the limitations of stare decisis ). The other major implication of
19071-408: The law of civil procedure , can open-endedly demand evidence from the other party or parties by means of discovery devices such as interrogatories , requests for production of documents , requests for admissions and depositions . Discovery can be obtained from non-parties using subpoenas . When a discovery request is objected to, the requesting party may seek the assistance of the court by filing
19234-428: The law. Therefore, a judge could reject another judge's opinion as simply an incorrect statement of the law, in the way that scientists regularly reject each other's conclusions as incorrect statements of the laws of science. In turn, according to Kozinski's analysis, the contemporary rule of binding precedent became possible in the U.S. in the nineteenth century only after the creation of a clear court hierarchy (under
19397-619: The mainland. In areas administered by the Republic of China, the legislative basis of tort law is the Civil Code of the Republic of China whose legal system was modelled after the Japanese Six Codes system, which itself was primarily based on the German pandectist approach to law. In general, article 184 provides that a person who "intentionally or negligently" damages another person's rights
19560-1132: The majority of types of law traditionally under state control, but must be regarded as 50 separate systems of tort law, family law, property law, contract law, criminal law, and so on. Most cases are litigated in state courts and involve claims and defenses under state laws. In a 2018 report, the National Center for State Courts ' Court Statistics Project found that state trial courts received 83.8 million newly filed cases in 2018, which consisted of 44.4 million traffic cases, 17.0 million criminal cases, 16.4 million civil cases, 4.7 million domestic relations cases, and 1.2 million juvenile cases. In 2018, state appellate courts received 234,000 new cases. By way of comparison, all federal district courts in 2016 together received only about 274,552 new civil cases, 79,787 new criminal cases, and 833,515 bankruptcy cases, while federal appellate courts received 53,649 new cases. States have delegated lawmaking powers to thousands of agencies , townships , counties , cities , and special districts . And all
19723-407: The medieval period. As transportation improved and carriages became popular in the 18th and 19th centuries, however, collisions and carelessness became more prominent in court records. In general, scholars of England such as William Blackstone took a hostile view to litigation, and rules against champerty and maintenance and vexatious litigation existed. The right of victims to receive redress
19886-457: The mid-19th century. Lawyers and judges used English legal materials to fill the gap. Citations to English decisions gradually disappeared during the 19th century as American courts developed their own principles to resolve the legal problems of the American people. The number of published volumes of American reports soared from eighteen in 1810 to over 8,000 by 1910. By 1879 one of the delegates to
20049-530: The modern states of Ohio , Indiana , Illinois , Michigan , Wisconsin , and the northeastern part of Minnesota . The District of Columbia Organic Act of 1801 incorporated Washington, D.C. , and placed it under the exclusive control of the United States Congress . The Organic Act for the Territory of New Mexico was part of the Compromise of 1850 , passed September 9, 1850. Primarily concerned with slavery ,
20212-528: The most famous is the Miranda warning . The writ of habeas corpus is often used by suspects and convicts to challenge their detention, while the Third Enforcement Act and Bivens actions are used by suspects to recover tort damages for police brutality. The law of civil procedure governs process in all judicial proceedings involving lawsuits between private parties. Traditional common law pleading
20375-664: The most significant states that have not adopted the FRCP. Furthermore, all three states continue to maintain most of their civil procedure laws in the form of codified statutes enacted by the state legislature, as opposed to court rules promulgated by the state supreme court, on the ground that the latter are undemocratic. But certain key portions of their civil procedure laws have been modified by their legislatures to bring them closer to federal civil procedure. Generally, American civil procedure has several notable features, including extensive pretrial discovery , heavy reliance on live testimony obtained at deposition or elicited in front of
20538-527: The operation of hazardous activity. This differs greatly from the English approach as it includes all kinds of resulting liability, rather than being limited to damage to land. In New Zealand, the tort system for the majority of personal injuries was scrapped with the establishment of the Accident Compensation Corporation , a universal system of no-fault insurance . The rationale underlying New Zealand's elimination of personal injury torts
20701-416: The perennial inability of legislatures in the U.S. to enact statutes that would actually force law enforcement officers to respect the constitutional rights of criminal suspects and convicts, the federal judiciary gradually developed the exclusionary rule as a method to enforce such rights. In turn, the exclusionary rule spawned a family of judge-made remedies for the abuse of law enforcement powers, of which
20864-530: The person's control. There was no liability for killing livestock, if the livestock was about to hurt someone. In contemporary China, however, there are four distinct legal systems in force, none of which are derived from classical Chinese law: Portuguese civil law in Macau, common law in Hong Kong, a German-style civil law system adopted by the Republic of China following Japan's model, and a primarily civil law system in
21027-427: The plaintiff is left better off than before the transaction. Since the economic loss rule would eliminate these benefits if applied strictly, there is an exception to allow the misrepresentation tort if not related to a contract. The remedies and defences available in common law jurisdictions are typically similar, deriving from judicial precedent with occasional legislative intervention. Compensation by way of damages
21190-591: The plaintiff must prove to establish negligence. In most common law jurisdictions, there are four elements to a negligence action: Some jurisdictions narrow the definition down to three elements: duty, breach and proximately caused harm. Some jurisdictions recognize five elements, duty, breach, actual cause, proximate cause, and damages. However, at their heart, the various definitions of what constitutes negligent conduct are very similar. Depending on jurisdiction, product liability cases such as those involving warranties may be considered negligence actions or fall under
21353-411: The precedent established in the English case of Rylands v Fletcher , upon which the Indian doctrine of absolute liability is based, anyone who in the course of "non-natural" use of his land "accumulates" thereon for his own purposes anything likely to cause mischief if it escapes is answerable for all direct damage thereby caused. While, in England and many other common law jurisdictions, this precedent
21516-582: The presence of reception statutes, much of contemporary American common law has diverged significantly from English common law. Although the courts of the various Commonwealth nations are often influenced by each other's rulings, American courts rarely follow post-Revolution precedents from England or the British Commonwealth. Early on, American courts, even after the Revolution, often did cite contemporary English cases, because appellate decisions from many American courts were not regularly reported until
21679-567: The present status of laws (with amendments already incorporated in the text) that have been amended on one or more occasions. Congress often enacts statutes that grant broad rulemaking authority to federal agencies . Often, Congress is simply too gridlocked to draft detailed statutes that explain how the agency should react to every possible situation, or Congress believes the agency's technical specialists are best equipped to deal with particular fact situations as they arise. Therefore, federal agencies are authorized to promulgate regulations. Under
21842-532: The principle of Chevron deference, regulations normally carry the force of law as long as they are based on a reasonable interpretation of the relevant statutes. Regulations are adopted pursuant to the Administrative Procedure Act (APA). Regulations are first proposed and published in the Federal Register (FR or Fed. Reg.) and subject to a public comment period. Eventually, after a period for public comment and revisions based on comments received,
22005-499: The purpose of protecting an interest of the actor or of a third party (including the innocent person) against a dangerous situation, which may have arisen owing to the wrongful conduct of another or the behaviour of an animal, or through natural forces. Two types of emergency situations may be found: Civil and criminal law were not clearly delineated in Ancient Chinese law as they are in modern legal systems. Therefore, while Tort Law
22168-401: The pursuer, by demonstrating that the defender owed to them a 'duty of care' which they ultimately breached by failing to live up to the expected standard of care . If this can be shown, then the pursuer must also establish that the defender's failure to live up to the expected standard of care ultimately caused the loss (damnum) complained of. There is a distinction between defences aimed at
22331-580: The relevant state law is irrational or just bad public policy. Under Erie , such federal deference to state law applies only in one direction: state courts are not bound by federal interpretations of state law. Similarly, state courts are also not bound by most federal interpretations of federal law. In the vast majority of state courts, interpretations of federal law from federal courts of appeals and district courts can be cited as persuasive authority, but state courts are not bound by those interpretations. The U.S. Supreme Court has never squarely addressed
22494-468: The rest were unpublished and bound only the parties to each case. As federal judge Alex Kozinski has pointed out, binding precedent as we know it today simply did not exist at the time the Constitution was framed. Judicial decisions were not consistently, accurately, and faithfully reported on both sides of the Atlantic (reporters often simply rewrote or failed to publish decisions which they disliked), and
22657-600: The role served by administrative courts in many civil law jurisdictions and much of the function of constitutional review in other jurisdictions, thereby functioning as a branch of administrative law rather than private law . Rather than developing principles of administrative fairness as a distinct branch of law as other common law jurisdictions have, Indian courts have thus extended tort law as it applies between private parties to address unlawful administrative and legislative action. Within Canada's common law provinces, there
22820-453: The rule of stare decisis . This is where the act of deciding a case becomes a limited form of lawmaking in itself, in that an appellate court's rulings will thereby bind itself and lower courts in future cases (and therefore also implicitly binds all persons within the court's jurisdiction). Prior to a major change to federal court rules in 2007, about one-fifth of federal appellate cases were published and thereby became binding precedents, while
22983-422: The rule of binding precedent in a 2008 majority opinion signed by Justice Breyer : Justice Brandeis once observed that "in most matters it is more important that the applicable rule of law be settled than that it be settled right." Burnet v. Coronado Oil & Gas Co. [...] To overturn a decision settling one such matter simply because we might believe that decision is no longer "right" would inevitably reflect
23146-540: The sale of goods has become highly standardized nationwide as a result of the widespread adoption of the Uniform Commercial Code. However, there is still significant diversity in the interpretation of other kinds of contracts, depending upon the extent to which a given state has codified its common law of contracts or adopted portions of the Restatement (Second) of Contracts . Parties are permitted to agree to arbitrate disputes arising from their contracts. Under
23309-431: The state in order to maintain the rule of law: the investigative objective of discovery is the prerogative of the executive branch , and insofar as discovery may be able to facilitate the creation of new rights, that is the prerogative of the legislative branch . The availability of discovery in common law jurisdictions means that plaintiffs who, in other jurisdictions, would not have sufficient evidence upon which to file
23472-448: The state constitutions, statutes and regulations (as well as all the ordinances and regulations promulgated by local entities) are subject to judicial interpretation like their federal counterparts. It is common for residents of major U.S. metropolitan areas to live under six or more layers of special districts as well as a town or city, and a county or township (in addition to the federal and state governments). Thus, at any given time,
23635-455: The state. While criminal law aims to punish individuals who commit crimes, tort law aims to compensate individuals who suffer harm as a result of the actions of others. Some wrongful acts, such as assault and battery , can result in both a civil lawsuit and a criminal prosecution in countries where the civil and criminal legal systems are separate. Tort law may also be contrasted with contract law , which provides civil remedies after breach of
23798-468: The term tort is generally used. The word 'tort' was first used in a legal context in the 1580s, although different words were used for similar concepts prior to this time. A person who commits a tortious act is called a tortfeasor. Although crimes may be torts, the cause of legal action in civil torts is not necessarily the result of criminal action. A victim of harm, commonly called the injured party or plaintiff , can recover their losses as damages in
23961-491: The test established in Anns v Merton LBC . In Singapore, the current leading case is Spandeck Engineering v Defence Science and Technology Agency , which builds on Anns by establishing a two step test comprising an analysis of proximate cause and public policy as a universal test, independent from the individual circumstances of a given case, for determining the existence of a duty of care. The Supreme Court of Canada established
24124-623: The tort law of a variety of jurisdictions in Asia and Africa. There is a more apparent split in tort law between the Commonwealth countries and the United States. Despite diverging from English common law in 1776, earlier than the other common law jurisdictions, United States tort law was influenced by English law and Blackstone's Commentaries , with several state constitutions specifically providing for redress for torts in addition to reception statutes which adopted English law. However, tort law globally
24287-441: The traditional common law torts. These are loosely grouped into quasi-torts or liability torts. The tort of negligence is a cause of action leading to relief designed to protect legal rights from actions which, although unintentional, nevertheless cause some form of legal harm to the plaintiff. In order to win an action for negligence, a plaintiff must prove: duty, breach of duty, causation, scope of liability, and damages. Further,
24450-481: The two remedies is that the aquilian action serves a compensatory function (i.e. providing economic damages to restore the plaintiff to their previous state) while the actio iniuriarum provides for non-economic damages aimed at providing solace to the plaintiff. In Roman-Dutch law (but not in Scots law), there is also a distinct action for pain and suffering relating to pain and suffering and psychiatric injury, which provides for non-economic damages similar to those under
24613-430: The use of non-economic damages caps and other tort reform measures. Apart from proof that there was no breach of duty (in other words, that a tortious act was not committed in the first place), there are three principal defences to tortious liability in common law jurisdictions: Discovery (or disclosure), a concept unique to common law jurisdictions, is a pre-trial procedure in a lawsuit in which each party, through
24776-499: The wronged person or their clan. Fines in the form of wīte ( lit. ' blame ' or ' fault ' ) were paid to the king or holder of a court for disturbances of public order, while the fine of weregild was imposed on those who committed murder with the intention of preventing blood feuds . Some wrongs in later law codes were botleas 'without remedy' (e.g. theft, open murder, arson, treason against one's lord), that is, unable to be compensated, and those convicted of
24939-438: The wrongfulness element and defences which serve to exclude fault . Grounds of justification may be described as circumstances which occur typically or regularly in practice, and which indicate conclusively that interference with a person's legally protected interests is reasonable and therefore lawful. They are practical examples of circumstances justifying a prima fade infringement of a recognised right or interest, according to
25102-406: Was an illegal nuisance depended upon the area and whether the activity was "for the benefit of the commonwealth", with richer areas subject to a greater expectation of cleanliness and quiet. The case Jones v Powell (1629) provides an early example, in which a person's professional papers were damaged by the vapors of a neighboring brewery. Although the outcome of this case is unclear, Whitelocke of
25265-445: Was imprisoned. It arose in local courts for slander , breach of contract , or interference with land, goods, or persons. Although the details of its exact origin are unclear, it became popular in royal courts so that in the 1250s the writ of trespass was created and made de cursu (available by right, not fee); however, it was restricted to interference with land and forcible breaches of the king's peace. It may have arisen either out of
25428-575: Was misinterpreted by English courts. The case of Ultramares Corporation v. Touche (1932) limited the liability of an auditor to known identified beneficiaries of the audit and this rule was widely applied in the United States until the 1960s. The Restatement (Second) of Torts expanded liability to "foreseeable" users rather than specifically identified "foreseen" users of the information, dramatically expanding liability and affecting professionals such as accountants, architects, attorneys, and surveyors . As of 1989, most U.S. jurisdictions follow either
25591-454: Was not a distinct area of law, concepts familiar to tort law were present in the criminal laws. However, by the late feudalism period, personal injury and property damage torts were mostly focused on compensation. The earliest "tort case" known from Ancient China is from the Zhou dynasty . During a famine one person robbed another's barn by sending his slave to steal the grain. He was sued and
25754-479: Was regarded by later English scholars as one of the rights of Englishmen . Blackstone's Commentaries on the Laws of England , which was published in the late 18th century, contained a volume on "private wrongs" as torts and even used the word tort in a few places. In contemporary common law jurisdictions, successful claimants in both tort and contract law must show that they have suffered foreseeable loss or harm as
25917-467: Was relatively unavailable. The English welfare state , which provides free healthcare to victims of injury, may explain the lower tendency towards personal injury lawsuits in England. A similar observation has also been made with regard to Australia . While Indian tort law is generally derived from English law , there are certain differences between the two systems. Indian tort law uniquely includes remedies for constitutional torts, which are actions by
26080-603: Was replaced by code pleading in 27 states after New York enacted the Field Code in 1850 and code pleading in turn was subsequently replaced again in most states by modern notice pleading during the 20th century. The old English division between common law and equity courts was abolished in the federal courts by the adoption of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure in 1938; it has also been independently abolished by legislative acts in nearly all states. The Delaware Court of Chancery
26243-601: Was securing equality of treatment for victims regardless of whether or the extent to which they or any other party was at fault. This was the basis for much of Professor Patrick Atiyah 's scholarship as articulated in Accidents, Compensation and the Law (1970). Originally his proposal was the gradual abolition of tort actions, and its replacement with schemes like those for industrial injuries to cover for all illness, disability and disease, whether caused by people or nature. In addition to
26406-442: Was viewed as relatively undeveloped by the mid-19th century; the first American treatise on torts was published in the 1860s but the subject became particularly established when Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr wrote on the subject in the 1880s. Holmes' writings have been described as the "first serious attempt in the common law world to give torts both a coherent structure and a distinctive substantive domain", although Holmes' summary of
26569-508: Was widely accepted, understood, and recognized by the Founding Fathers at the time the Constitution was ratified. Several legal scholars have argued that the federal judicial power to decide " cases or controversies " necessarily includes the power to decide the precedential effect of those cases and controversies. The difficult question is whether federal judicial power extends to formulating binding precedent through strict adherence to
#876123