AN OVERVIEW ON

THE LAW OF TORT

MUHAMAD ABRAL BIN ABU BAKAR
LECTURER, DEPT OF LAW,
FACULTY OF LAW & GOVERNMENT
LECTURE OUTLINE

1. INTRO: TEXTBOOKS, CASEBOOK, STATUTE BOOK AND

OTHER REFERENCES
2. ORIGINS OF TORT
3. DEFINITION OF TORT
4. TORT IS A BRANCH OF CIVIL LAW
1. INTRODUCTION ON:
TEXTBOOKS, CASEBOOK,
STATUTE BOOK,
AND OTHER REFERENCES
1. TEXTBOOKS, CASEBOOK,
STATUTE BOOK AND OTHER
REFERENCE
• John Murphy and Christian Witting, “Street on Torts” (14th edn, OUP, 2015)
• W V H Rogers, “Windfield and Jolowicz on Tort”, (Latest Edition)
• Chris Turner and Sue Hodge, “Unlocking Torts” (4rd edn, Routledge, 2014)
• Markesinis and Deakin’s Tort Law, (Latest Edition)
• Hepple and Mathews, Tort Cases and Materials, (Latest Edition)
• Statute Book: Contract, Tort & Restitution (Latest Edition)
2. ORIGINS OF TORT
 2. ORIGINS OF TORT

 The law of tort is part of the English common law which has developed
incrementally since Norman times.
 Academic writers are not agreed whether there is a law of tort or law
of torts.
 A law of torts recognizes that there are various separate and distinct
aspects but also implies that the separate parts have something in
common.
 A law of tort implies some general common rules relevant to all parts of
the law.
 Although some modern tort have been created by statute, the law is
still generally found in common law principles. Examples of tort
created by statute: Occupiers Liability Act 1957, Health and Safety
At Work Act 1974.
 Most law in tort still found in common law.
 For example, the tort of negligence can be traced back since the case
of “Donoghue v Stevenson” which established “neighbour principle”.
 Another example: the rule in Rylands v Fletcher, tort of nuisance.
3. Definition of Tort
 3. Definition of Tort

 Theword “tort” is derived from the Latin word

“tortus” meaning “twisted”

 InEnglish the word “tort” means: - a legal wrong

for which the law provides a remedy.
 3. Definition of Tort

Street on Tort, at page 3 explains:

“Tort is that branch of the civil law relating to obligations imposed by

operation of law on all natural and artificial persons. These
obligations, owed by one person to another, embody norms of conduct
that arise outside (or in addition to) contract and unjust enrichment.
Tort enables the person to whom the obligation is owed to pursue a
remedy on his own behalf where breach of a relevant norm of conduct
infringes his interests to a degree recognized by the law as such an
infringement”
Winfield and Jolowicz on Tort
“Tortious liability arises from the breach of a duty primarily fixed by
law: this duty is towards persons generally and its breach is redressible
by an action for unliquidated damages”
(Unlocking Torts: page 3)

The definition is helpful in that it shows that there are three elements:-
1. A duty fixed by law – as we shall see this does not necessarily by
statute but a duty which courts recognized
2. The duty must be owed generally – as we shall see individual torts
have been developed so that a general duty is owed to any person in a
position to bring an action based on that tort
3. The breach of duty must entitle the claimant to general damages
4. TORT IS A BRANCH OF CIVIL
LAW

1. PARTIES TO ACTION UNDER TORT

2. ALTERNATIVE METHOD FOR COMPENSATION
 Tort is a branch of civil law.
 It is based on the claim that the defendant has caused damage to the claimant by
breaking a relevant duty imposed by the general law.

Duty imposed A drives negligently and

by law Break of duty hits another road user B
The “victim”
may claim
Duty of care between compensation
road users Claim in
from the
Suffer damages Tort
“tortfeasor”

B suffer personal injury

Where is Law of Tort?

Criminal contract
law

trust
Land law Commercial

law
TORT LAW
Family
Constitutional
law
laws
Parties to an action in tort

Capacity to sue

 The usual principle to all civil law applies to tort.

 To bring action, the party must have legal capacity
 Minor can neither bring nor defend an action in their own name but must rely on
representative by a suitable adult.
 Similar rule applies to people of unsound mind.
The State

 As the Crown is traditionally regarded as the fount of all justice, the old idea that
the “King can do no wrong” is maintained and no action can be brought against
the sovereign personally, nor in respect of certain prerogative and statutory
powers.
 Until 1947, the only remedy against the Crown was by way of petition of right
asking the monarch for redress of a wrong.
 This anomaly then was dealt with by the Crown Proceeding Act 1947 which
present position is the Crown is usually in the same position as any other legal
person and can therefore sue or be sued in relation to torts in much the same way
as anyone else. It also brought Crown immunity in tort to an end in most
circumstances.
Minors

 GR: minors may be liable for their own tortious activities.

 The fact of immaturity is IRRELEVANT in some cases.
 Victims of child tortfeasors might well hope that the minor’s parents would be
liable for the child’s wrongdoing, however it is not the case, unless:-
a. The parent can be shown to have vicarious liability, or
b. The parent has personally be negligent.
Married Person

 Where claim is made by one spouse to the other, proceeding are not subject to any
special rules except that the court has power to stay any proceedings if no
substantial benefit is likely to be obtained by either party if the matter continues.
Corporations

 A corporations is an artificial person having legal personality by virtue of

incorporation.
 A corporation can sue for any tort which is committed against it save for those
where commission of the tort is clearly impossible, for example false
imprisonment.
 Similarly, the corporation is an appropriate defendant, usually by virtue of
vicarious liability as the employer of someone who has in fact committed the tort.
Partnerships

 Partnerships do not have legal personality and cannot therefore sue or be sued.
 A right of action vests in the partners who sue as individuals.
 Where a tort has been committed by the firm, the individual partners have joint
and several liability to the claimant.
 Note: a new type of partnership was brought into being by the Limited Liability
Partnerships Act 2000. Where a partnership is formed by virtue of the Act, it has
its own personality and can sue or be sued in the same way as any other
corporation.
THE END