LAW1124 - Torts Study Notes PDF

Preview

Summary

Consolidated notes and cases of lectures, powerpoints, module notes and compulsory readings. Everything you need for passing the 1124 exam is contained within. ...

Description

USQ LAW1124 Civil Obs C: Torts - Study Notes p 1

Negligence

5

Concepts:

5

Elements: Calculus of   Negligence   (if   this   comes   up,   include   the   above   elements   in   answer)

5 5

Defences: Definitions:

5 6

Cases:

6

Nervous Shock

7

Concepts Onus

7 7

Elements Recovery:

8 8

‘Something More’:  Previous Steps   for   NS:

9 9

Modern Developments: Relevant Factors   of   Foreseeability:

9 9

Modern Approach: Rules of   Determination: Statutory Limits on   Claims Cases Intentional Torts: Trespass

9 10 10 10 11

Trespass is Elements:

11 11

Defences to   Intentional   Torts:  Consent:

11 11

Necessity: Self Defence:

12 12

Other Defences: 

12

Trespass to the Person

12

Battery:

12

Elements (as   per   Trespass   + Element   X): Assault

13 13

Elements (as   per   Trespass   + Element   X): False Imprisonment   (deprivation   of   liberty):

13 14

Elements (All   elements   of   Trespass  +   D is   at   Fault): Statutory:

14 14

Remedies: Comparison Chart

14 15

Cases

15

Trespass to Land

16

Concepts:

16

Elements: Must Establish:

16 16

Remedies:

17

Trespass to Goods/Chattels

17

Concepts: Trespass to   personal   Property Trespass to   Goods   (Chattels)

17 17 17

Must Establish: 

17

Remedy/Recovery: Conversion:

18 18

Must Establish:  Detinue:

18 19 USQ LAW1124 Civil Obs C: Torts - Study Notes p 1

USQ LAW1124 Civil Obs C: Torts - Study Notes p 2 Cases (Trespass to   Land  &   Chattels): 

19

Remedies for Trespass

21

Remedies for   Trespass   to Person

21

Remedies for   Trespass   to Personal   Property   (Goods/Chattels) Damage for   Trespass   to   Personal   Property   (Goods/Chattels)

21 21

Damages for Conversion General Factors   for   Determining   Actual   Loss

21 21

Damages for Detinue Injunction

21 21

Replevin (rarely   used)

22

Limitation

22

Defences for Trespass

22

Mistake

22

Consent Valid Consent

22 22

Consent to Medical   Treatment Consent in   Sports 

22 22

Revocation or Withdrawal of   Consent  Burden of Proof

22 22

Self-defence, Defence   of   Another Defence of   Property

23 23

Provocation (Qld) Queensland Criminal   Code   1899

23 23

Necessity/ Urgent   Situations  Defences Specific   to Trespass   to Personal   Property

23 23

Discipline Power Insanity and   Involuntarism

23 23

Illegality: Ex   turpi   causa   non   oritur   actio Cases

23 23

Economic Loss

25

Concepts: History:

25 25

Typical Claims   for   Pure   Economic   Loss:  Approaches:

25 26

The Salient   Features   Approach:   Perre. Salient Features:   Subsequent   Features

26 26

Considerations/features which   were   applied   by   the   courts   in   deciding   cases   of   pure   economic   loss. Negligent Provision   of   Services   (Hill   v  Van   Erp   - Tort   9.130   p370)

27 27

Defective Building   Cases/or   ‘transferred   loss’   case  Exclusory Rule:

27 27

Indeterminate Liability   ‘Ripple   effect’   see   Mod   6 p   3-12: Main points: 

27 27

The Caltex   Case  The Perre   Case:

27 28

The Ball   v  Consolidated   Rutile   [1991]   case: Johnson Tiles   v  Esso   Aus   [2003]   case:

28 28

McMullin v ICI   Aust.   Case:  Cases Negligent Misrepresentation/Negligent Statement (Economic Loss)

28 28 30

Concepts: Elements:

30 30

Special Relationship

30

Barwick Test   - Elements Scope of The Barwick Test:   6 Issues

30 31

Liability to a Third Party: Auditors

31 USQ LAW1124 Civil Obs C: Torts - Study Notes p 2

USQ LAW1124 Civil Obs C: Torts - Study Notes p 3 Further Factors   Relating   to the   Existence   of  A   Duty   of   Care Statutory Based Actions

31 31

Fraud (Deceit)

31

Remedies Cases

31 31

Concurrent and Vicarious Liability Concepts: Vicarious Liability

33 33 33

Elements of   Vicarious   Liability

33

Existence of   a Relationship   of   Employer   and   Employee Tests

33 33

The Control   Test The Organisation   Test 

33 33

The ‘Enterprise   Test’ Multi-facet Test

33 33

Specific Employment   Cases Acting in   the   Course   (Scope)   of   Employment Wrongful Mode The Frolic   Doctrine

33 34 34 34

Prohibition by   Employer The Employer’s   Indemnity   from   the   Employee 

34 34

Direct Liability   for   Harm   Caused   by   Independent   Contractors Non-Delegable Duties

34 34

Multiple Tortfeasors

34

Joint Concurrent   Liability Concurrent Liability   at   Common   Law

34 35

Legislation: Law   Reform   Act   1995   (Qld) Proportionate Liability

35 35

Cases:

35

Nuisance

36

Definition of   Nuisance:   Public   and   Private

36

Elements of   Private   Nuisance Private Nuisance   - Title   to   Sue 

36 36

An Interference with  A   Right   Attached   to Land Rights Capable of   Protection Interferences Causing   Material   Damage  Interferences with   Enjoyment 

36 36 36 36

Tests for   Substantial   and   Unreasonable   Interference Damage

37 37

Private Nuisance:   Who   May   be   Found   Liable?  Private Nuisance:   By   Material   Physical   Damage

37 37

Private Nuisance   and   Personal   Injuries Defences Private Nuisance;   Onus   of   Proof Private Nuisance;   Defences Cases Defamation

37 37 37 38 38 39

Definition and   General:

39

Features of Defamation: Legislative Status   of   Defamation: 

39 39

Elements: Business Defamation  Injurious   Falsehood: 

39 40

Defences in   Defamation: Defence of   Justification   (Truth)   - s25 Defence of   Contextual   Truth - s26

40 40 40 USQ LAW1124 Civil Obs C: Torts - Study Notes p 3

USQ LAW1124 Civil Obs C: Torts - Study Notes p 4 Defence of   Absolute   Privilege   - s27  Defence for   Publication   of   Public   Documents   - s28(1)

40 41

Defence of   Fair   Report   of   Proceedings   of   Public   Concern   - s29 Defence of   Qualified   Privilege   - s30

41 41

Defence of   Honest   Opinion   - s31 Defence of   Innocent   Dissemination   - s32

41 41

Defence of   Triviality   - s33 Defamation Remedies:  Damages for Non-economic Loss  Reputation Vindication

41 41 42 42 42

Damages for Economic Loss Aggravated Damages

42 42

Mitigation of   Damages  Apologies - s20

42 42

Offer of Amends  A Defence for   the   P’s   Failure   to Accept   the   Offer

42 42

Cases:

42

USQ LAW1124 Civil Obs C: Torts - Study Notes p 4

USQ LAW1124 Civil Obs C: Torts - Study Notes p 5

Negligence Concepts: ❖ Negligent acts   causing   physical   damage   can   be   sued   upon   in   negligence   or trespass if  the   interference   is   direct:    Williams  ilotin (1957). v M ➢ Indirect interference,    whether   by   act   or   omission,   may   be   actionable   in   negligence   but   not   trespass. ❖ A negligence   action   is   only   available   where   the  P   has   actually   suffered   injury,   damage or loss, in the   form   of   a physical  personal injury   (including   illness),   physical   damage   to property,   a recognised   psychiatric   injury   illness   and/or   purely financial loss. ❖ ALSO, if  Disabled   persons   likely   to be   nearby,   even   if  slight,   Negligence   exists:   Glasgow  C  orp  v  T  aylor [1922].  tepney B  orough C  ouncil ❖ Abnormal P: Only when   abnormality   is   known   it  here   a duty   based   on   abnormality:   Paris  v  S  ondon E  lectricity  B  oard [1965] (blind man [1951] (one eyed   man   goggles - held   liable);   Haley v  L   fell   in   hole   -  held   liable).  ➢ In the absence of the knowledge, only recover in injury to a normal person, if reasonably foreseeable: Hegarty v QLD Ambulance [2007]   (P   failed   to alert   employer   of   work   stress   - held   not   liable). ❖ Unborn P: Mother   can   be   held   liable   for   injury   to her   foetus.   Medical   practitioner   can   be   held   liable.  iability A  ct 2  003 ❖ Wrongful Birth: Previously allowed   to   be   held   liable,   now   regulated   by   CLA   s  49A   and   49B   - C  ivil  L (QLD).

Elements: To establish liability   in   negligence   there   are   three   elements   to be   satisfied  : 1. D owed a  d  uty o  f c are to P; a. In all c ases, b  efore D  uty c an a  rise, F  oreseeability o  f i njury i s essential.   req   of   reasonable   foreseeability b. Something other -  “ proximity”, m  ay b  e r equired: D  onoghue . ‘Neighbour Principle’ contains req   of   ‘reasonableness’:   a value   judgement   by   the   court:   Tame . c. Not necessary t he p  recise s equence o  f e  vents b  e r easonably f oreseeable: C  hapman  v  H   will   be  earse ( 1961). It sufficient to establish   that   the   risk   of   injury   was   reasonably   foreseeable. 2. D breached t his duty;  a. Reference to reasonable p  erson i n D  ’s position;  b. Foreseeable, D s hould h  ave o  r o  ught to h  ave k nown a  nd ‘ not f ar-fetched o  r f anciful’: W  yong  S  hire C  ouncil v  S  hirt (1980). c. Under CLA l egislation, b  ut n  ot c ommon l aw, r isk m  ust h  ave b  een ‘ not s ignificant’: D  rinkwater  v  H  owarth [2006]. d. Must be c onclusive, a   r easonable p  erson w  ould h  ave t aken precautions. e. See Calculus o  f N  egligence below f. At Common L  aw ‘ obviousness’ i s one   factor considered in   determining   a reasonable   person   would   have   taken precautions: Vairy v  W   See Defences    yong S  hire C  ouncil (2005). (cf  ( 3) below)(see Definitions  ( Obvious r isk) below)   breached   by   failure   to warn   of   it.   (see   Definitions ( Inherent R g. If the r isk i s ‘ inherent’ ,  duty is only  isk)  below) 3. D’s breach c aused t he i njury to P  w  hich i s n  ot t oo remote. a. Causation - a  q  uestion o  f fact. i. CLA legis: f actual c ausation a  nd s cope o  f l iability. ( does n  ot a  pply to W  orkers C  omp Legis) ii. But For t est, t he b  ut f or t est a  sks w  hether t he p  laintiff w  ould h  ave s uffered n  o i njury w  ithout the  &  M  H S  tramare P  ty L  td (  1991). defendant's breach:   March v  E iii. ‘But for’ c ausation a  t C  ommon L  aw m  ay a  lso e  stablished w  here P   i s i njured w  ithout D  s b  reach, b  ut P  astings L  td  v  W  ardlaw  [1956]. proves Ds   breach   contributed   to worse   injury:   Bonnington  C iv. Ds breach ‘ is n  ecessary to c omplete a   s et o  f c onditions t hat a  re j ointly s ufficient to a  ccount f or the occurrence of   harm',   this   will   satisfy   the   but   for   test   both   at   common   law   and   as   embodied   in   the   CLA legislation: Strong  v  W  oolworths L  td [  2012].  ars  L  td v. Multiple Sufficient C  auses: O  ne o  r m  ore a  cts w  hich s ufficiently c aused P  ’s I njury: P  erformance C v A  braham [1962]. b. Remoteness: Normative c onsideration. S  hould D  b  e h  eld liable? i. An injury w  ill b  e t oo r emote u  nless i t i s o  f a   t ype t hat i s a   f oreseeable c onsequence o  f t he defendant's  ankship  ( UK)  L  td  v breach of duty, even if more extensive   than   could   have   been   foreseen:   Overseas  T   rule).  Miller  S  teamship  P  ty L  td ( The W  agon  M  ound ( No  2  ))  [1967]. (eggshell skull ● ●

While duty a  nd b  reach n  eed o  nly b  e e  stablished i n r elation to the o  riginal i njury, c ausation a  nd r emoteness m  ust be  cLean (1996) satisfied in   relation   to both   the   original   injury   and   any   consequential   losses:   Commonwealth v  M Where all t hese t hree e  lements a  re e  stablished, t he d  efendant w  ill b  e l iable u  nless h  e o  r s he c an e  stablish a   defence.

Calculus of   Negligence   (if   this   comes   up,   include   the   above   elements   in   answer)  Elements (CLA 9(2)): 1. Likelihood of H  arm i f c are n  ot taken; 2. Likely seriousness o  f a  ny harm; 3. The burden o  f t aking precautions; 4. The social u  tility o  f t he a  ctivity i n q  uestion.

And (CLA 10(a)): 5. The burden o  f t aking p  recautions to a  void t he risk which eventuated   and   similar   risks   for   which   the   D may be   responsible:   Wyong S  hire v  S  hirt.

Defences: 1. 2.

If D a  cted i n a  m  anner r ationally a  ccepted a  s c ompetent b  y t heir p  eer p  rofessional -  N  O B  REACH: R  ogers . (see  egligence) below) Definitions ( Medical N If reasonable p  erson w  ould h  ave i gnored t he r isk -  N  o B  REACH: B  olton v  S  tone  [ 1951]. USQ LAW1124 Civil Obs C: Torts - Study Notes p 5

3.

USQ LAW1124 Civil Obs C: Torts - Study Notes p 6 Under CLA l egis -  I f ‘ obvious r isk’, s ubject to limited e  xceptions, d  uty i s n  ot b  reached b  y f ailing t o w  arn o  f i t. (see Definitions ( Obvious r isk) below)

Definitions: Risk: Inherent Torts 10.150

CLA s 16 A D i s n  ot l iable i n N  egligence f or h  arm s uffered b  y a  nother p  erson a  s a   r esult o  f m  aterialisation of an inherent   risk.   If   the   risk   is   inherent,   the   duty   can   only   be   breached   by   a failure   to   warn   of   it (CLA Section 16).   This   provision   does   not   appear   in   the   ACT   or   Tasmanian   legislation.

Risk: Obvious Torts 10.150, 10.165

CLA s13(1) Where risk   is   Obvious,   the   D may   not   have   to do   anything   or   at   most   can   give   a warning. If   the   risk is obvious,   then   subject   to limited   exceptions,   the   duty   cannot   be   breached   by   failing   to warn   of it (Sections 13   & 15)   whereas   at   common   law   obviousness   is   one   of   the   number   of factors taken into   account   into   determining   whether   a reasonable   person   would   have   taken precautions:  yong S  hire C  ouncil ( 2005) 223   CLR 422; ❖ ○ Vairy  v  W  offs H  arbour C  ity C  ouncil (2005) 223   CLR   486;  ❖ ○ Mulligan  v  C   CLR   234.  ❖ ○ Thompson  v  W  oolworths ( Qld) P  ty L  td (2005) 221 This provision   does   not   appear   in   the   ACT   or   Victorian   legislation.

Medical Negligence: Bolam  test

In medical negligence cases, courts used to   apply a test known as the Bolam test, which derived  olam  v  F  riern  H  ospital  M  anagement from McNair   J’s   direction   to   the   jury   in   the   English   case,  B  Committee  [1957] 1 WLR 582.   that   the   court   had   to   hold   that   the   defendant   doctor   was   not In effect, the Bolam  t est meant negligent if  some   of   the   expert   witnesses   (‘a   responsible   body’)   said   that   she   or   he   acted properly in   the   circumstances.  arquhar  [1988] 1 Qd R The Bolam  t est had been applied in   Australia   (see,   for   example,   Dwan  v  F   234). However,   in   Rogers and a subsequent significant decision,  N  axakis v  W  estern G  eneral   of   Australia   held   that   Bolam  s hould not   be   applied   in   cases   of   medical Hospital ,  the High Court negligence. That   is   to sa...