crim ch 7 - TORTS

the object of torts

to compensate victims of either intentional or negligent acts

• no guilt in torts, only a testing of individual or collective liability

negligence

a person or legal entity will be found to be negligent when their or its conduct falls below the standard expected of the reasonable person in the specific circumstances in question and when damages are incurred as a results of this negligence

reasonable person

a fictional character who exists in private law (most notably in torts) , who decides whether explanations offered by the wrongdoer are rational

plaintiff

a person thats been harmed by the actions of another and commences a lawsuit

balance of probabilities

the standard of proof in civil lawsuits and most arbitrations; requires that a party prove that its version of the facts is more probable than that of its opponenet

mens rea

evil mind

• the intent to commit the act complained of

• in order for an individual to be found guilty of a crime, they must have an “evil mind”

mens rea and torts law

no requirement of mens rea

• in intentional tort law, the defendant must merely have intend their physical act, not the consequences of said act

actus reus

“the evil act”, a key component of conviction for any criminal offence

• for an individual to be convicted of a crime, mens rea and actus rea must coincide at the time of the offence

damages

the sum of money awarded by a court as compensation for harm or loss caused

PUNITIVE damages

damages that are awarded in tort beyond what is necessary to compensate an individual or a legal entity for losses sustained and for pain/suffering.

• purpose is to deter the conduct in question, thus bringing a public law objective to the realm of private law

• kinda rare

liability

the determination of fault or responsibility in a private law actions

• differs from a “finding of guilt” which is the determination that a judge must make before a wrongdoer can be convicted in criminal law

intentional tort

torts that occur as a result of a wrongdoer intentionally (or apparently intentionally) harming another either physically or mentally. 

• include torts of assault, trespass, and defamation

• also called TRESPASS tort

2 questions that arise from the standard in trespass torts versus the standard in negligence

1. is the standard for liability for trespass torts similar to the standard imposed in instances of negligence

2. is it similar to the standard imposed for conviction in criminal cases

   1. consider with respect to the first question, the case of Bettel v Yim

compensatory damages

money (or other items) awarded to a plaintiff to repair actual loss suffered

2 part test for vicarious liability laid out in bazley v curry

1. the relationship between the tortfeasor and the person against whom liability is sought must be sufficiently close

2. the wrongful act must be sufficiently  connected to the conduct authorized by the employer

social host liability

liability attaching to a person who provides alcohol to an individual who subsequently causes an accident that causes injury or death to a third party

4 elements to prove social host liability

1. that there was a duty of care owed to the complainant

2. that the defendant breached that duty of care

3. that the complainant suffered damage and,

4. that the damage was indeed caused by the actions of the defendant 

torts mix

mix of private and public interests