LC1003 LAW OF TORTS

INTRODUCTION TO TORTS

1 Introduction
1.1 Definition
1.2 Anatomy of a tort suit
2 Distinction between law of torts and other areas of law
3 Tort theories
3.1 Corrective justice
3.2 Distributive justice
3.3 Others
4 Classifications within law of torts
4.1 Types of torts
4.2 Degree of blameworthiness
4.3 Types of protected interests

1
torts notes
1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Definition
1. A civil wrong for which the law provides a remedy
(a) “civil” – private, between 2 individuals (as opposed to “criminal”)
(b) “wrong” – committed by defendant (tortfeasor) to plaintiff, defined by law (case?
statute?)
(c) “remedy” – compensated to plaintiff to restore “pre-accident” status
2. Flow of law of torts
(a) Did the defendant actually commit the tort?
(b) Extent/degree of liability?
(c) Quantum of damages

1.2 Anatomy of a tort suit

1. ∏ claims ∆ committed tort against them
2. ∏ claims they suffered injury
(a) Must prove causation of damage, remoteness of damage
3. ∆ can also undermine any significant part of ∏’s claim or argue he is excused by defence
(a) Complete defences, partial defences
(b) Also arguing against remoteness of damage (Hillary)
4. Is there actionable damage? (de minimis rule: law does not encourage parties to bring legal
actions for technical breaches of rules or agreements where the impact of the breach is
negligible, a trifle)
5. If ∆ was not the actor, is there vicarious liability or non-delegable duty?
6. If court determines ∏ has proven their case, what remedies are available?

2
torts notes
2 DISTINCTION BETWEEN LAW OF TORTS AND OTHER
AREAS OF LAW

2.1 Tort versus criminal law

3. Tortfeasor commits “wrong” against victim (private input) vs criminal commits “wrong”
against society (state input)
(a) State identifies the actus reas and mens rea, no private input
4. Victim pursues cause of action vs state prosecution (private and public expenditure)
5. Remedy (compensation via money or performance) vs punishment (imprisonment, fine, etc.)
(a) Tort law aims to restore victim to “pre-accident” status as if tort did not occur
(b) Criminal law aims to
(i) Punish, rehabilitate criminals
(ii) Provide retribution for victims
(iii) Deter similar behaviour

2.2 Tort versus contract law

1. Both are civil obligations, but tort requires no prior agreement
2. Tort obligations are determined by the law vs contract obligations agreed on between parties
3. Compensation perspective
(a) Tort – ∏ argues that they have suffered damages due to tort (backward looking,
restitutio in integrum)
(b) Contact – ∏ argues that they did not receive the benefits agreed upon (forward
looking, status quo ante)
4. Tort may exist alongside a contract (court has to decide – contract or tort?)

3
torts notes
3 TORT THEORIES

3.1 Corrective justice

1. Concerned with “fairness” between the two immediate parties
2. ∆ has a duty to repair (or “correct”) the ∏’s loss, provided that
(a) Circumstances constituted a wrong
(b) ∆ was responsible for the wrong

3.2 Distributive justice

1. Prevalence of insurance and insured persons in tort actions challenges above theory; doctrine
of vicarious liability suggest that law of torts is concerned beyond tortfeasor and victim
2. Can be used to redistribute economic wealth fairly in the community i.e. wealthier authorities
can more fairly compensate ∏

3.3 Others
1. Both corrective justice and distributive justice theories can work in tandem
2. Retributive justice focuses on the “evil” committed by the wrongdoer, and ∆ should
compensate for all the losses suffered by ∏
3. Theory of deterrence is concerned with preventing future misconduct of ∆, as well as potential
∆s
(a) Consideration of economic efficiency

4
torts notes
4 CLASSIFICATIONS WITHIN LAW OF TORTS

4.1 Types of torts

1. Intentional torts
(a) E.g., trespasses to the person (assault and battery, false imprisonment), torts causing
economic loss
(b) ∆ must have acted with state of mind to intentionally interfere with ∏’s body, “real”
harm not required
2. Negligence
(a) Failure to take reasonable care to prevent harm to others to whom owes a duty of care
(b) State of mind of ∆ irrelevant (who intentionally chooses to be negligent/careless?),
“real” harm must be shown
3. Near-strict liability
(a) E.g., property-related torts, nuisance
(b) As long as interference is proven, ∆ will be liable, no excuses

4.2 Degree of blameworthiness

1. In decreasing order,
(a) An act, greatest degree of voluntariness
(b) Words or misstatements
(c) Pure omission
2. Degree generally determined by societal perceptions

4.3 Types of protected interests

Rights that law of torts protect along with its contrasting real harm, are listed in hierarchy of importance.
1. Integrity of person – ∆ should not interfere with ∏’s body
(a) Physical injury
(b) Non-physical injury
(i) Psychiatric harm
(ii) Loss by owner of enjoyment of his property (i.e., nuisance)
(iii) Loss of genetic affinity - ACB v Thomson Medical Pte. Ltd. [2017] 1 SLR 918

2. Integrity of property – ∆ should not damage ∏’s lands

(a) Destruction of property
3. Integrity of financial status – ∆ should not cause loss of ∏’s wealth
(a) Pure economic loss

5
torts notes
 (b) Consequential economic loss
4. Integrity of reputation
(a) Defamation

6
torts notes