|
Canadian Tort Law
Canadian tort law is composed of two parallel systems: a common law framework outside Québec and a civil law framework within Québec, making the law system is bijural, as it is used throughout Canadian provinces except for Québec, which uses private law. In nine of Canada's ten provinces and three territories, tort law originally derives that of England and Wales but has developed distinctly since Canadian Confederation in 1867 and has been influenced by jurisprudence in other common law jurisdictions. As most aspects of tort law in Canada are the subject of provincial jurisdiction under the Canadian Constitution, tort law varies even between the country's common law provinces and territories. In the country's common law provinces, a tort consists of a wrongful acts or injury that lead to physical, emotional, or financial damage to a person in which another person could be held legally responsible. The two main subcategories of tort law are intentional torts and unintention ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Tort
A tort is a civil wrong, other than breach of contract, that causes a claimant to suffer loss or harm, resulting in legal liability for the person who commits the tortious act. Tort law can be contrasted with criminal law, which deals with criminal wrongs that are punishable by the state. While criminal law aims to punish individuals who commit crimes, tort law aims to compensate individuals who suffer harm as a result of the actions of others. Some wrongful acts, such as assault and battery, can result in both a civil lawsuit and a criminal prosecution in countries where the civil and criminal legal systems are separate. Tort law may also be contrasted with contract law, which provides civil remedies after breach of a duty that arises from a contract. Obligations in both tort and criminal law are more fundamental and are imposed regardless of whether the parties have a contract. While tort law in civil law jurisdictions largely derives from Roman law, common law jurisdictio ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Bettel V
{{disambiguation ...
Bettel may refer to: * Bettel, Luxembourg, a village in the commune of Tandel * Bettel (cards), a bid to take no tricks in certain card games * '' Bettel v Yim'', a 1978 Canadian tort case * Xavier Bettel (born 1973), Luxembourgish politician and lawyer * Tania Bettel, Luxembourgish cyclist who won the 1992 women's National Championship * Michael Bettel (died 2003), British drummer for the band Tank A tank is an armoured fighting vehicle intended as a primary offensive weapon in front-line ground combat. Tank designs are a balance of heavy firepower, strong armour, and battlefield mobility provided by tracks and a powerful engine; ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Public Policy Doctrine
In private international law, the public policy doctrine or (French: "public order") concerns the body of principles that underpin the operation of legal systems in each state. This addresses the social, moral and economic values that tie a society together: values that vary in different cultures and change over time. Law regulates behaviour either to reinforce existing social expectations or to encourage constructive change, and laws are most likely to be effective when they are consistent with the most generally accepted societal norms and reflect the collective morality of the society. In performing this function, Cappalli has suggested that the critical values of any legal system include impartiality, neutrality, certainty, equality, openness, flexibility, and growth. This assumes that a state's courts function as '' dispute resolution systems'', which avoid the violence that often otherwise accompanies private resolution of disputes. That is, citizens have to be enco ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Anns Test
was a decision of the House of Lords that established a broad test for determining the existence of a duty of care in the tort of negligence, called the Anns test or sometimes the two-stage test for true third-party negligence. The case was overruled by ''Murphy v Brentwood DC'' 991 Facts and background In 1962, the local authority of Merton approved building plans for the erection of a block of maisonettes. The approved plans showed the base wall and concrete foundations of the block to be 'three feet or deeper to the approval of local authority'. The notice of approval said that the bylaws of the council required that notice should be given to the council both at the commencement of the work and when the foundations were ready to be covered by the rest of the building work. The council had the powers to inspect the foundations and to require any corrections necessary to bring the work into conformity with the bylaws but was not under an obligation to do so. The block of ma ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Pure Economic Loss
Economic loss is a term of art which refers to financial loss and damage suffered by a person which is seen only on a balance sheet and not as physical injury to person or property. There is a fundamental distinction between pure economic loss and consequential economic loss, as pure economic loss occurs independent of any physical damage to the person or property of the victim. It has also been suggested that this tort should be called "commercial loss" as injuries to person or property can be regarded as "economic". Examples of pure economic loss include the following: *Loss of income suffered by a family whose principal earner dies in an accident. The physical injury is caused to the deceased, not the family.. *Loss of market value of a property owing to the inadequate specifications of foundations by an architect.. *Loss of production suffered by an enterprise whose electricity supply is interrupted by a contractor excavating a public utility. The latter case is exemplified by ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Damages
At common law, damages are a remedy in the form of a monetary award to be paid to a claimant as compensation for loss or injury. To warrant the award, the claimant must show that a breach of duty has caused foreseeable loss. To be recognized at law, the loss must involve damage to property, or mental or physical injury; pure economic loss is rarely recognized for the award of damages. Compensatory damages are further categorized into special damages, which are economic losses such as loss of earnings, property damage and medical expenses, and general damages, which are non-economic damages such as pain and suffering and emotional distress. Rather than being compensatory, at common law damages may instead be nominal, contemptuous or exemplary. History Among the Saxons, a monetary value called a '' weregild'' was assigned to every human being and every piece of property in the Salic Code. If property was stolen or someone was injured or killed, the guilty person had to pay th ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Proximate Cause
In law and insurance, a proximate cause is an event sufficiently related to an injury that the courts deem the event to be the cause of that injury. There are two types of causation in the law: cause-in-fact, and proximate (or legal) cause. Cause-in-fact is determined by the "but for" test: But for the action, the result would not have happened.. (For example, but for running the red light, the collision would not have occurred.) The action is a necessary condition, but may not be a sufficient condition, for the resulting injury. A few circumstances exist where the but-for test is ineffective (see But-for test below). Since but-for causation is very easy to show (but for stopping to tie your shoe, you would not have missed the train and would not have been mugged), a second test is used to determine if an action is close enough to a harm in a "chain of events" to be legally valid. This test is called proximate cause. Proximate cause is a key principle of insurance and is con ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Reasonable Person
In law, a reasonable person or reasonable man is a hypothetical person whose character and care conduct, under any ''common set of facts,'' is decided through reasoning of good practice or policy. It is a legal fiction crafted by the courts and communicated through case law and jury instructions. In some practices, for circumstances arising from an ''uncommon set of facts,'' this person represents a composite of a relevant community's judgement as to how a typical member of that community should behave in situations that might pose a threat of harm (through action or inaction) to the public. The reasonable person is used as a tool to standardize, teach law students, or explain the law to a jury. The reasonable person belongs to a family of hypothetical figures in law including: the "right-thinking member of society", the "officious bystander", the "reasonable parent", the "reasonable landlord", the "fair-minded and informed observer", the "person having ordinary skill in the ar ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Standard Of Care
In tort law, the standard of care is the only degree of prudence and caution required of an individual who is under a duty of care. The requirements of the standard are closely dependent on circumstances. Whether the standard of care has been breached is determined by the trier of fact, and is usually phrased in terms of the reasonable person; this is sometimes labeled as the "reasonable physician standard". It was famously described in ''Vaughn v. Menlove'' (1837) as whether the individual "proceed[ed] with such reasonable caution as a prudent man would have exercised under such circumstances". Professional standard of care In certain industries and professions, the standard of care is determined by the standard that would be exercised by the reasonably prudent manufacturer of a product, or the reasonably prudent professional in that line of work. Such a test (known as the "Bolam Test") was used to determine whether a doctor was liable for medical malpractice before the 2015 ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Duty Of Care
In Tort, tort law, a duty of care is a legal Law of obligations, obligation that is imposed on an individual, requiring adherence to a standard of care, standard of Reasonable person, reasonable care to avoid careless acts that could foreseeably harm others, and lead to claim in negligence. It is the first element that must be established to proceed with an action in negligence. The claimant must Cause of action, be able to show a duty of care imposed by law that the defendant has breached. In turn, breaching a duty may subject an individual to liability. The duty of care may be imposed ''by operation of law'' between individuals who have no ''current'' direct relationship (familial or contractual or otherwise) but eventually become related in some manner, as defined by common law (meaning case law). Duty of care may be considered a formalisation of the social contract, the established and implicit responsibilities held by individuals/entities towards others within society. It ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Negligent Infliction Of Emotional Distress
The tort of negligent infliction of emotional distress (NIED) is a controversial cause of action, which is available in nearly all U.S. states but is severely constrained and limited in the majority of them. The underlying concept is that one has a legal duty to use reasonable care to avoid causing emotional distress to another individual. If one fails in this duty and unreasonably causes emotional distress to another person, that actor will be liable for monetary damages to the injured individual. The tort is to be contrasted with intentional infliction of emotional distress in that there is no need to prove intent to inflict distress. That is, an accidental infliction, if negligent, is sufficient to support a cause of action. History NIED began to develop in the late nineteenth century, but only in a very limited form, in the sense that plaintiffs could recover for consequential emotional distress as a component of damages when a defendant negligently inflicted physic ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Negligence
Negligence ( Lat. ''negligentia'') is a failure to exercise appropriate care expected to be exercised in similar circumstances. Within the scope of tort law, negligence pertains to harm caused by the violation of a duty of care through a negligent act or failure to act. The concept of negligence is linked to the obligation of individuals to exercise reasonable care in their actions and to consider foreseeable harm that their conduct might cause to other people or property. The elements of a negligence claim include the duty to act or refrain from action, breach of that duty, actual and proximate cause of harm, and damages. Someone who suffers loss caused by another's negligence may be able to sue for damages to compensate for their harm. Such loss may include physical injury, harm to property, psychiatric illness, or economic loss. Elements of negligence claims To successfully pursue a claim of negligence through a lawsuit, a plaintiff must establish the " elements" of neg ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
