100% tevredenheidsgarantie Direct beschikbaar na je betaling Lees online óf als PDF Geen vaste maandelijkse kosten
logo-home
Eerder door jou gezocht
Eerder door jou gezocht
logo
Tort Law: Wilkinson v Downton Notes $7.30
In winkelwagen
Snel navigeren naar
Voorbeeld
  2.  
  3. The University Of Birmingham (UBir)
  4.  
  5. The University Of Birmingham
  6.  
  7. Law Of Tort

College aantekeningen

Tort Law: Wilkinson v Downton Notes
 1 keer verkocht
  • Vak
  • Law Of Tort
  • Instelling
  • The University Of Birmingham (UBir)
  • Boek
  • Tort Law

This document contains all the necessary lecture and textbook notes for the topic of Wilkinson v Downton under Trespass. Covers the requirements, the Harassment Act 1997, refences and remedies.

Voorbeeld 1 van de 5  pagina's

Document informatie

  • 14 juni 2021
  • 5
  • 2020/2021
  • College aantekeningen
  • Samantha schnobel
  • Alle colleges

Onderwerpen

  • tort law
  • law
  • trespass
  • wilkinson v downton
  • defences
  • intentional infliction of harm

Gekoppeld boek

book image

Titel boek:

Auteur(s):

  • Uitgave:
  • ISBN:
  • Druk:

Meer samenvattingen voor studieboek

  • (Complete Answered) Test Bank For Tort Law, 7th Edition J. Stanley Edwards, J.D.Traci L. Cull, J.D Chapter 1-19
Alles voor dit studieboek (1)

Geschreven voor

  • The University of Birmingham (UBir)
  • The University of Birmingham
  • Law Of Tort
Alle documenten voor dit vak (5)

Verkoper

avatar-seller
rueakbar

Ontvangen beoordelingen

Voorbeeld van de inhoud

Intentional Infliction of Harm
The Rule of Wilkinson v Downton - Tort
Introduction:
Wilkinson v Downton Harassment Act 1997
• The Rule in Wilkinson v Downton concerns the intentional, indirect infliction of harm. It is different from battery
which requires touching, as here, there doesn’t need to be direct toughing.

Wilkinson v Downton [1897] 2 Q.B. 57
• C was a landlady of a pub. Someone she knew (D) told her that her husband had been in an accident and had
broken both legs. This was a lie, the man wanted to prank C. C suffered nervous shock and a later illness that
lasted 4 weeks. D was found liable.

• Wright J at 58-9:
“The defendant has … wilfully done an act calculated to cause physical harm to the plaintiff - that is to say, to
infringe her legal right to personal safety, and has in fact thereby caused physical harm to her. That proposition
without more appears to me to state a good cause of action, there being no justification alleged for the act. This
wilful injuria is in law malicious, although no malicious purpose to cause the harm which was caused, nor any
motive of spite is imputed to the defendant.”


Requirements of the Tort:
1. An act on D’s part that has caused harm to C.
2. D must have intention to cause harm to C.

• The harm to C must be a recognised psychiatric illness, nothing like anxiety or distress. It must be serious distress
etc.

Wong v Parkside Health NHS Trust [2001] EWCA Civ 1721
• What level of harm is required for liability?
• This was a case of bullying. C would have to show that the harm was more than merely distressing. There would
have to be physical injury or recognised psychiatric illness.

• Hale L.J. at [12]:
“For the tort to be committed, … there has to be actual damage. The damage is physical harm or recognised
psychiatric illness. The defendant must have intended to violate the claimant’s interest in his freedom from such
harm. The conduct complained of has to be such that that degree of harm is sufficiently likely to result that the
defendant cannot be heard to say that he did not ‘mean’ it to do so.


Wainwright v Home Office [2001] EWCA Civ 2081
• Mother and son visited a prison; both were subjected to a strip search which was not appropriate and not
supposed to happen. The boy developed PTSD due to him being unlawfully touched (battery). The mother had
not been unlawfully touched but also brought a claim for her distress. It was decided there was no claim for the
mother as the correct level of intention was not present.

• Lord Hoffmann:
[44] “I do not resile from the proposition that the policy considerations which limit the heads of recoverable
damages in negligence do not apply equally to torts of intention. If someone actually intends to cause harm by a
wrongful act and does so, there is ordinarily no reason why he should not have to pay compensation. But I think
that if you adopt such a principle you have to be very careful about what you mean by intend.”


C v D [2006] EWHC 166 (QB), [2006] 2 WLUK 629 (not very authoritative case!)
• School abuse case. The courts decided that the first incident (videoing) only resulted in distress, so no claim was
possible. However the second incident (stripping) led to psychiatric harm which could lead to a claim. D’s
recklessness also amounts to intention.

• Field J at [94]:
“It is clear from what Lord Hoffmann says [in Wainwright] that even if an intention to cause harm can be
established the principle in Wilkinson v Downton (including imputed intention) is only available if the harm suffered

Dit zijn jouw voordelen als je samenvattingen koopt bij Stuvia:

Bewezen kwaliteit door reviews

Bewezen kwaliteit door reviews

Studenten hebben al meer dan 850.000 samenvattingen beoordeeld. Zo weet jij zeker dat je de beste keuze maakt!

In een paar klikken geregeld

In een paar klikken geregeld

Geen gedoe — betaal gewoon eenmalig met iDeal, creditcard of je Stuvia-tegoed en je bent klaar. Geen abonnement nodig.

Direct to-the-point

Direct to-the-point

Studenten maken samenvattingen voor studenten. Dat betekent: actuele inhoud waar jij écht wat aan hebt. Geen overbodige details!

Veelgestelde vragen

Wat krijg ik als ik dit document koop?

Je krijgt een PDF, die direct beschikbaar is na je aankoop. Het gekochte document is altijd, overal en oneindig toegankelijk via je profiel.

Tevredenheidsgarantie: hoe werkt dat?

Onze tevredenheidsgarantie zorgt ervoor dat je altijd een studiedocument vindt dat goed bij je past. Je vult een formulier in en onze klantenservice regelt de rest.

Van wie koop ik deze samenvatting?

Stuvia is een marktplaats, je koop dit document dus niet van ons, maar van verkoper rueakbar. Stuvia faciliteert de betaling aan de verkoper.

Zit ik meteen vast aan een abonnement?

Nee, je koopt alleen deze samenvatting voor $7.30. Je zit daarna nergens aan vast.

Is Stuvia te vertrouwen?

4,6 sterren op Google & Trustpilot (+1000 reviews)

Afgelopen 30 dagen zijn er 65040 samenvattingen verkocht

Opgericht in 2010, al 15 jaar dé plek om samenvattingen te kopen

Begin nu gratis

Laatst bekeken door jou

Samenvatting ·

(1)

Samenvatting Infectieziekten

Tentamen (uitwerkingen) ·

(0)

ATI RN Fundamentals Proctored Exam

Tentamen (uitwerkingen) ·

(0)

MA MPJE - 247 CMR Accurate 100%

Samenvatting ·

(0)

Samenvatting Crisishantering

Samenvatting ·

(0)

Samenvatting 2019 Geert Devos

Samenvatting ·

(0)

Introduction to Biomolecules

Samenvatting ·

(0)

Orale pathologie deel I en deel II

Tentamen (uitwerkingen) ·

(0)

NSG 6420 APEA endocrine Exam

Overig ·

(1)

Mnm2607 assignment 4 solution 2023

$7.30  1x  verkocht
  • (0)
In winkelwagen
Toegevoegd