Class 2: Torts

*REMEDIES for TORTS* Compensatory Damages -Remoteness -Mitigation

*Compensatory* Defendant must pay money to reimburse plaintiff's loss. (Tort is backwards looking, contracts are forward looking) •Remoteness >tortfeasor will not liable for any loss suffered by an injured party that is too 'remote'. Meaning the judge will ask if a reasonable person in the defendant's position would have realized might have cause the harm to plaintiff (does not apply to intentional torts) EXAMPLE: Suppose that one of your employees develops a rare disease after coming into contact with rat urine. You might not be liable even if you carelessly allowed rats to run loose in your warehouse. A judge once held that a reasonable person would recognize the danger of rat bites, but not rat urine. • Mitigation >The injured party cannot claim any loss that results from its failure to take *reasonable* steps to minimize the consequences of the tortfeasor's wrongful act. >Reasonable steps, No duty to mitigate (but will reduce compensation), Extent of loss (compensation is only given for the loss if the plaintiff did mitigate) , Costs of mitigation (plaintiff can also claim the costs of mitigating as damages)

What is contractual damages? Tortious Damages? Look backward assessment?

*Contractual Damages* compensate for the loss incurred because the party in breach failed to fulfill his/her contractual obligation. *Forward Looking* ; designed to place the innocent party in the position it would have occupied has the contract not been breached *Tortious Damages* compensate the victim for any consequential loss or costs incurred (eg. loss of wages) *Look backward Assessment* Calculated to place the injured party in the position it occupied BEFORE the tortious act occurred

*REMEDIES FOR TORTS* Injunction

*Injunctions* -Court order that requires the defendant to do something or refrain from doing something -(Close a smelly pig farm or tear down a billboard in someone else's properrty)

*TYPES OF TORTS* What is an Intentional Tort? Negligence? Strict Liability? >What is the only defence for this? (Different shown in pic) Vicarious Liability? >Social policy reasons for this? (D, C, F)

*Intentional Tort* An action intentionally undertaken by a person causing injury or damage to another -For certain torts the intention must have been to injure or damage another. -For other torts the intention must have been only to act in a certain way (not necessarily to cause injury or damage to another). *Negligence* -A Careless act causing injury to another -Whether the tortfeasor intended the action or meant to cause injury or damage is not relevant *Strict Liability* he tortfeasor did not intend to commit a wrongful act, nor did the wrongful act arise from his/her carelessness. (Fletcher Case) It is sufficient that the action caused or resulted in injury or damage to another. (If I sell alcohol to someone under 19, even if i THOUGHT he was older than 19 i will still be charged) Strict liability offences are those under the OHSA *only defence* is proof that the party who caused the dangerous situation exercised due diligence (so.. they showed me a fake ID, i went the extra step to make sure he was 19)

*GENERAL PRINCIPLES OF TORT LAW* -Liability Insurance -Vicarious Liability -Remedies

*Liability Insurance* A contract in which an insurance company agrees, in exchange for a price, to pay damages on behalf of someone who incurs a liability. *Vicarious Liability* Legal Liability is assessed against one person for the actions of another.(Based on OHRC and common law doctrine) Eg. Parents liable for childrens' action, employers liable for employees' actions, church liable for priests' actions. Social policy reasons: *Deterrence* Eg, incents employers to take particular care in the people they employ *compensation* Expands the range of those liable to compensate injured party *Fairness* Serves community purpose to hold employers, church, parents liable.. Refer to case (Non-marine underwriters)

*REMEDIES FOR TORTS* Nominal Damages

*Nominal Damages* -Awarded for some torts -Symbolically recognize that the defendant committed a tort even though the plaintiff did not suffer any loss.

*REMEDIES FOR TORTS* Punitive Damages

*Punitive Damages* -Do not compensate the injured party for a provable loss arising from a tortious act, but rather they *punish* the tortfeasor for conduct that is harsh vindictive, reprehensible and malicious & discourage other wrongdoers. -Only available in exceptional circumstances (so You could pay $100,000 in punitive damages for sexual harassment, but not because the victim lost that amount of money, but rather its meant to punish you)

*ALTERNATE COMPENSATION SCHEMES* What are the 2 systems that are alternate compensation schemes? What are 2 main reasons for the rise of alternative compensation schemes??

-Tort law is not the only source of compensation. *Alternate Compensation Schemes* allows a person who has suffered an injury to receive compensation without bringing an action in tort. *2 Systems* -Worker's Compensation (WSIA) -No-fault Insurance *worker's compensation* >Workers generally lose the right to sue in tort for workplace injuries, but in exchange, they gain the right to claim compensation from a fund without having to prove that anyone was at fault for their injuries -t overrides the right of the employee to take legal action against the employer. *No fault* -for example, the victim of a traffic accident cannot sue in tort, but they are entitled to receive compensation from the scheme without having to prove that another driver was at fault. - in Ontario, the no-fault system prevents an action in tort unless the victim's losses are especially serious. *Two Reasons* >Fault; Tort law is fault based. Victims however view injury the same be it someones fault or not. It's desirable to allow compensation regardless of fault -Covers auto accidents. Compensated through insurance. >Cost; Tort law is inefficient. Requires time and expense. There is a need for less costly investigations and disputes. CONS: It provides way less compensation.

Is a tort a contrast to Contracts? What is *privity* (Difference between Tort and Contract in pic)

Yes, parties voluntarily enter a contract, whereas a tort is a private wrong arising from general duty owed to each other. *Privity* a contractual duty applies only to the parties to the contract, Tortious duties cast a wider net. There is no need for a special relationship to exist between parties.

What is a tort? LEgal rights, duties and liabilities are generated by? By Contrast, what is a public wrong? What is a tortfeasor? (Difference between tort law and criminal law in picture)

a wrongful act or an infringement of a right (other than under contract) leading to civil legal liability. (Wrongdoing in Private Law) French Tort = wrong Latin Tortus = Twisted/crooked Tort is a *common law doctrine* Generated by Judge-made laws Private wrong, a failure to fulfil a private duty imposed by law (in all instances imposed by common law, as opposed to statute law) Public wrong is a breach of duty owed to the state (eg. criminal offence) >*note* a committed wrong can be a crime AND a tort *Tortfeasor* The person including corporations who commit a tort.