Tort Law and the Liabilities - Essay Example

? Tort Law By of 2712 Words Introduction As people interact in society, instances abound in which civil wrongs are committed against individuals and groups. These civil wrongs are referred to as tort in the legal context. In other terms, tort refers to a collection of rights, responsibilities and remedies applicable in the justice system, more so in civil lawsuits to compensate and relieve those affected or harmed by the wrongful actions or omissions by others1. Those who sustain injuries or losses due to tortious conducts are referred to as plaintiffs while those responsible for the injuries and are liable for the damages are referred to as defendants or tortfeasors2. In essence, tort law is applicable in circumstances where an individual’s or a group’s negligence, carelessness, and/or failure to take precautionary actions results in other parties’ to incurring pain, losses, discomfort, harm, incapacitation and/or death3. Although they may cause losses and pain to their victims and their loved ones, it should be clear from the onset that not all tort cases are criminal acts. It is therefore imperative that the victim of another’s negligence or carelessness seeks compensation for the loss or pain suffered. In case a victim dies, his/her loved ones or beneficiaries should follow up with the justice system for compensation. An example of a tort case law in the UK is the Hughes versus Lord Advocate of 1963. In this case, workmen from the Post Office had gone for a 5pm tea break leaving an open but protected manhole on Russell Road unattended. A ten-year old child walking on the road with his uncle meddled with the manhole and the equipment. He even went down the manhole. On coming out, the appellant tripped and the lamp fell back into the manhole. Its fuel leaked and it exploded making the child to sustain rather serious injuries. The tort case was thus formed on the basis of negligence by the Post Office employees who left the site unattended despite the dangers it posed to the public. Among the issues that came up in the case was whether the accident was foreseeable in nature and if it occurred due to the Post Office employees’ negligence. To properly follow up and be compensated for the losses and pain suffered, tort victims and any other parties ought to know their rights and liabilities. One of the rights of victims of tort is entitlement to receive financial damages from those responsible. Among the accidents for which damages may be paid once categorized as legal injuries include physical and emotional injuries, reputation damages, violation of privacy, constitutional rights violation and economic injuries that affect a person’s economic stability4. This paper advises parties to an accident scene on their rights and liabilities in tort by apportioning liabilities and identifying predictability, proximity, negligence, liability and reasonability. The Liabilities First and foremost, it is vital that the basic principles and implication of tort lawsuits is known. In such a lawsuit, the appellant or the victim of a loss or harm seeks to make someone else responsible for the problem at hand. Thus, tort is a civil lawsuit in which the victim, who prosecutes instead of the state, seeks not for the defendant to be imprisoned but to be forced to compensate for the loss or injury suffered5. Therefore, tort lawsuits are unlike criminal lawsuits in which are prosecuted by the state and the defendant is punished. Instead, the judgment is in form of a liability, mainly financial payments. That is, all the legally-recognized costs suffered by the victim or his/her families are shifted to the defendant if the latter is found liable. Besides, financial liabilities, defendants may be barred by a court of law from interfering with the plaintiff’s life or wellbeing6. Thus, in some instances, a plaintiff could be awarded disciplinary damages besides the compensation given. However, the plaintiff only stands to be compensated only if the defendant has a legal duty not to cause the pain or loss a plaintiff suffers. The two types of duties that come out clearly in tort lawsuit are duties not to harm others and duties not to harm others negligently, recklessly, or intentionally. In essence, a defendant’s behaviour is controlled by liability when it flouts a duty not to injure negligently, recklessly, or intentionally. There are several types of liabilities encountered in tort situations that parties to a tort ought to be conversant with. These liabilities are occasioned by the different factors surrounding a tort situation. For instance, by injuring the group of children from St. Jane’s Care Home, the owners of the care home and the organic farm will have to be liable to several victims in different ways. Similarly, these different defendants could be held liable for the injuries suffered by a single victim. There are also scenarios in which victims are held liable for their losses and injuries. This latter situation is often encountered when it is proved that the victims contributed to their losses or injuries. Tort liabilities are generally grouped as joint liability, vicarious liability, third party liabilities (injuries are caused by interactions among parties), and victim liability7. There are several instances in which the parties in the organic farm case may be held responsible for the pain and losses suffered during the open day at the farm. The first liability that comes to mind is negligence which caused many of those present to suffer and some of them to die later. As a matter of fact, negligence is the typical cause or action in tort. That is, negligence causes most of civil wrongs encountered in common law8. In this case study, there was negligence with regards to personal safety of those in attendance and their property. The Healthy Organics Limited is thus liable to compensate the victims of all the accidents and personal injuries not only for the workers at the farm who suffered but also for the children who were left under their care. For instance, Maahir, the sculpture workshop operator was negligent by failing to check all the tools, leaving them exposed to the 12-year old children from St. Jane’s Care Home. In fact, one of the children took a chisel and started banging it on a table. Maahir could be described as negligent as he does not notice or stop the child, Fred, from banging the chisel on the worktop. In the end, the chisel flies from Fred’s hands and hits Syed on the head. The operators of the farm are also negligent and careless in giving the 12-year olds dirty gloves which one of the children rejects. That the employee mandated to take care of the children from St. Jane’s Care Home also chose to break of the duty of care bestowed on him and to wander to some areas implies negligence on his part. Just as in the Donoghue versus Stevenson case in which Mrs. Donoghue consumed a drink containing a decomposed snail in a public bar in Paisley, Scotland and sued Mr. Stevenson, the manufacturer for damages, the caretaker for the children is thus liable for breaching his legal duty of taking care of the children9. This breach led to their losses, suffering, trauma, and even death. However, it lies with the plaintiff to prove that the liability squarely falls on the defendant10. Useful elements in this proof include the existence of a breach of duty, proof that the victim was owed duty of care and that the defendant’s actions actually caused the loss or injury. There must also be proof that loss or injury was suffered due to the breach of duty by the defendant. Importantly, it must be proved by the plaintiff that the loss or injury incurred was not that remote. That is, the breach of duty by the defendant should be a proximate cause of the loss or injury incurred. An example of a tort case law in which negligence and breach of duty were evident was the Paris versus Stepney Borough Council case of 1950. In this case law, the council hired Paris, who had only one functional eye, as a garage-hand. In the process of loosening a car axle using a hummer, a chip of metal flew into his sighted eye, making him completely blind11. Paris sued the council for negligence tort since the council only gave eye protection gear to welders and tool-grinders12. The other type of liability incurred due to the actions and omissions of some of the parties at the farm open day is referred to as vicarious liability. This type of liability is incurred by people due to the acts committed by others. For instance, St. Jane’s Care Home as an employer could be held responsible for their employee’s intentional or accidental torts. However, the employee must have been acting within the scope of his duties as a caretaker for the children. In addition, the action by the employee that resulted in losses and injuries to other parties must have occurred within the space and time brackets authorized by the employer12. Otherwise, the employee may have to pay for the damages. Vicarious liability also occurs only if the actions were motivated by the employee’s need to serve the employer and thus the employee must have been hired to perform the said actions13. Harry, the St. Jane’s Care Home employee and Maahir the sculpture workshop operators may also face joint and/or several liabilities. For instance, both could be found liable for the injuries suffered by the children due to their negligence. Thus, parties may be severally or jointly held liable for the injuries and losses suffered during the open day. For an illustration, Harry did not get Fred’s records at the home care before they left for the open day at the farm. The implication here is that the home care was negligent in keeping the health records of its clients, thus jeopardising their wellbeing and endangering their lives. Parties’ Rights First, it is important to note that the law of torts deals with the resultant obligations brought about by the infringement of peoples’ primary rights. People who suffer personal injuries in accidents such as that suffered by the children during the rain in the tent have the right to recover all their past, present, and future physical, psychological, and emotional damages. In fact, this recovery could be achieved in a single lawsuit or multiple cases. Among the injuries often considered serious are pain and suffering, medical costs, out-of-pocket expenses, embarrassment, distress, permanent disability, disfigurement, humiliation and impairment of earning capacity14. The other enforceable right enjoyed by parties to a tort is right to protection of persons and their property from unjust losses or injuries. Second, the parties have a right to compensation as victims. This right can only be attained by holding accountable the people responsible for the losses or harm incurred15. To ensure these rights are provided and protected, the authorities must ensure and encourage the observance of minimum standards of social conduct in society, in the process, eliminating or reducing the violation of set social conduct standards16. It is also the right of all parties involved in a tort situation to have the losses and the liabilities incurred apportioned fairly depending on one’s role or contribution to the injuries. In its effort to protect people and property, tort law gives parties the right to use the legal system to resolve issues in which one party feels carelessness or negligence by the other caused his/her losses or injuries. Thus, through the legal system, the victim’s right to compensation is addressed, ensuring equity and fair play in society. The right to personal and property protection thus holds people responsible for their careless, negligent, and reckless actions that are harmful to others17. Just like their victims, perpetrators of negligent or reckless acts also have rights. Of great interest in tort situations is the right to fair allocation of losses. That is, all the participants in a tort situation should be considered either victims or tortfeasor. Tort law thus identifies who is in the best position to bear the largest portion of liabilities18. The victims of the tort situation at the organic farm also have a right to a public liability claim, which they should make against the injuries and trauma suffered from the incidents that occurred at the farm on the fateful day. That this farm was open and accessible to the public particularly makes the victims liable to make a public liability claim. Examples of public liability claims the victims have a right to include for injuries caused by slips, falls, trips, objects in unsafe or dangerous position, sharp or falling objects, unsafe footpaths, walk ways and roads, and other unsafe public property inside the farm19. Victims and the defendants also have a right to information on public liability claims so that they make adequate preparations and effective presentation of their cases20. The relatives, friends and loved ones of those who died due to the events at the farm also have a right to a unique type of claim due to loss of their loved one, often referred to as loss of consortium. Loss of consortium is a damage awarded to the family of a tort victim after he/she dies due to the carelessness or negligence of another person21. This type of compensation could also be paid if a victim of tort is severely disabled or incapacitated. In normal tort cases, the injured person is compensated. However, the scenario is quite different in case of loss of a consortium in which the law recognizes the family of the dead victim, which has a right to be compensated for suffering the loss of a loved one22. In this case study, Julie, Robert’s aunt who entirely dependent on her nephew has the right to a consortium lawsuit since she suffered damages due to the wrongful death of Robert after the tragic events at the farm. The incidents on the farm thus deprived Julie of the love and company of Robert. Nonetheless, the courts have to ascertain that the relationship between the victim and the one seeking compensation was close enough to cause severe damage due to loss of companionship. It should also be noted that a tort victim must not die for the damages to be awarded. In a marriage or a relationship, a spouse or a wife may be injured to an extent that jeopardizes their intimate relationships via severe disability or incapacitation, rendering them unproductive. The case of Tom, his girlfriend Gerry, and his three year old daughter, Maisy illustrates this scenario. Conclusion Tort refers to a set of laws, rights, responsibilities and remedies used in the justice system to address civil lawsuits in which one or more of the parties affected seek compensation for the losses or injuries suffered. To succeed in a tort lawsuit, it is necessary that the parties understand the basic principles and implications of tort. In tort lawsuits, the plaintiff seeks to make someone else responsible for the harm or loss suffered. Accordingly, tort refers to a civil lawsuit in which the victim rather than the state initiates and manages the process of prosecution. In this process, the plaintiff seeks not for the defendant to be imprisoned but to be forced to compensate for the loss or injury suffered. A major feature of tort is that a party suffers due to the reckless, careless and negligent actions and omissions of the other party, which should therefore compensate the victim. Included among the rights of tort victims are right to make a public liability claim and right to public liability claim information. Similarly, victims may also be held liable for their injuries if they are found to have contributed significantly to their injuries and losses. In the same context, the liability should be apportioned equitably and fairly among those found to be responsible for tortious actions and omissions. References Chapman, M. (2010) The snail and the ginger beer. Great Britain: Wildy, Simmonds & Hill Publishing. Coase, R. H. (1990) The firm, the market and the law. Chicago: Chicago University Press. Currie, S., and Cameron, D. (2000) Your law. Melbourne: Nelson Thomson Learning. Deakin, S., Angus, J., and Markesinis, B. (2003) Markesinis and Deakin's tort law. Oxford University Press. Feinman, J. (2010) Law 101. New York: Oxford University Press. Gerven, W. (2001) Cases, materials and text on national, supranational and international tort law. Oxford: Hart Publishing. Glannon, J. W. (2010) The law of torts: examples & explanations, fourth edition. Aspen Publishers. Hazard, G., and Angelo, C. D. (2004) Legal ethics. Stanford University Press. JISC (1950) United Kingdom House of Lords Decisions. Retrieved on January 7, 2013 from http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKHL/1950/3.html. John, C.P., Goldberg, A., Sebok, J., and Zipursky, B. C. (2008) Tort law: responsibilities and redress, cases and materials, second edition. Aspen Publishers. Lunney, M., and Oliphant, K. (2003) Tort law - texts, cases, second edition. Oxford University Press. Moore, M. S. (2000) “The Metaphysics of Causal Intervention.” California Law Review, 88(1), 827. Perry, R. (2006) The Role of Retributive Justice in the Common Law of Torts: A Descriptive Theory. Tennessee Law Review, 73(1) 177. Singer, R. G., and La Fond, J. Q. (2010) Criminal Law: Examples & Explanations, fifth edition. Aspen Publishers Inc. Sloan, E. A. (2009) Basic legal research: tools and strategies, fourth edition. Aspen Publishers. Taylor, M. R. (2004). Mrs. Donoghue's journey. Scottish Council of Law Reporting. Zipursky, B. C. (2009) Foreseeability in Breach, Duty and Proximate Cause. Wake F. L. Review, 441247, 1253. Read More