Tort Law

6. The Defence of Legal Authority
Enables D to engage in conduct whcih would otherwise be tortiuous
Elements: 1. was Ds act that gave rise to tort specicfically authorised by statute or                     common law?
2. was the D privelaged from criminal and civil liability?
3. did the D fulfill the other obligations that were imposed upon her in this                     process?
umbrella defence covering many statutory defences and therfore not a defence in itself
note: impact of Charter has been substantial

7. The Apportionment of Fault in Intentional Torts
Can a D in an intentional tort action invoke apportinment legislation (apportions losses btwn D and P according to respective degrees of fault) and use Ps contributory negligence as a partial defence

V THE BASIC CONCEPTS OF REMEDIES IN INTENTIONAL TORTS
1. Judicial and Extrajudicial Remedies
i) Judicial:a) damages
b) injunction
c) declaration
d) specific performance
ii) extrajudical: self help remedies, recapture of chattels, reentry onto land, abatement of nuicance

2. Classifications of Damages
- for either pecuniary or nonpecuniary losses
-Special damages those which are capable of exact quantification at the time of trial (require pleading and proof on part of P)
-General damages those which are incapable of such quantification

3. Nominal Damages
Traditionally awarded for those tort actions which are actionable w/o proof of loss - redress a violation of a legal right that the law deems worthy of prot’n in the abdsence of real harm.This right to claim in absence of harm est in The Mediana[1900](HL)

4. Compensatory Damages
Place P in situation he would have been in if it were not for wrong sufferred by means of monetary award
Damages are assesed at time injury occurs. Measure: make P whole, return to pos’n before commission of tort. Distinguish from K, where place P in pos’n would’ve been in if it were not for breach, Measure: what was reasonably forseeable at time K was made

5. Punitive Damages
Purpose is to punish D, avaiable when “conduct is reprehensible, unduly harsh, vindictive, malicious, fully deserving of condemnation and offensive to common standards of decency” (Norberg v Wynrib, B(P) v B(W)) extends Rookes v Barnard which limits awards of punitve damages to 1)abuses of power by gov’t
2)torts committed for profit (Claiborne Industries, Collins v Lussier)
Vorvis v insurance Corp. of British Columbia
Wallace v United Grain Growers

Related posts:

• Tort Law Self Defense Duty to Warn (0)
• Colorado Tort Attorneys (1)
• Federal Tort Claims Act (0)
• Definition of Tort (0)
• Colorado Tort Law (0)