This document provides a basic introduction to tort law - perfect for introducing yourself into the module.
It covers what tort is, the aims of tort law, how tort relates to human rights law and explains your interests and what type of tort they are protected by.
Chapter 1 – Introduction
What is tort law?
- A ‘tort’ is a civil wrong for which the law provides a remedy.
o The origin of the word ‘tort’ is from the Latin tortus (meaning crooked or
twisted), although the more usual translation is that from modern French
where it corresponds with ‘wrong’
o Thus, at its simplest, the law of tort is the law of non-criminal wrongs.
- What interests does tort law protect?
o Where someone has suffered an unwanted harm
Can involve physical injury, psychiatric injury or even death.
Harm can also include damage to property or financial loss
o Rights to bodily freedom and autonomy
Embraced physical and psychological integrity
- Some torts exist to protect just a single interest (e.g. defamation protects a person's
reputation, nuisance protects an individual’s interest in enjoying their land), but the
tort of negligence offers protection to all our legally recognised rights and interests.
The disparate aims of tort law
- Tort law looks both backwards at what happened (the wrong) and addresses the
harm done, while also looking to the future at ways of regulating behaviour and
developing responses to the risk of harm.
o It seeks to protect an individual's interests both prospectively and
retrospectively.
- The case of Woodroffe-Headley v Cuthbertson [1997] QBD is indicative and
revealing about the diverse purposes and functions of tort law.
o The case involved a negligence claim following a climbing accident on the
North Face of the Tour Ronde.
Hedley, who was an experienced climber, hired Cuthbertson, an
experience alpine climber, to guide him to the summit of the Tour
Ronde, a steep ice climb of about 350 meters.
At the time of the accident, Cuthbertson was leading.
Concerned about the head of the sun on the snow and the
danger of rock fall, he decided to protect Hedley on a single ice
screw belay in order to save time.
Cuthbertson had no recollection of the accident, however, another
climber on the mountain described how a large sheet of ice broke
away from under his feet, dragging him down with it.
The shock of the fall wrenched out the single ice screw and
Hedley was also dragged down. The rope caught on a rocky
outcrop and Hedley was killed instantly.
, Cuthbertson survived with a fractured knee.
o The question to the court was whether Cuthbertson had negligently caused
Hedley’s death.
The evidence that two ice screws and a running belay had been used,
Hedley would not have died.
Cuthbertson argued that given the pressures of time it was
reasonable to use a single screw.
Dyson J disagreed.
Cuthbertson, in deciding to dispense with a second screw and not
using a running belay, had fallen below the standard of care expected
of a reasonably competent and careful alpine guide.
The claimant (Hedley’s young son) was awarded £150,000 in
damaged.
- Corrective Justice:
o One argument from this case is that tort law should do corrective justice.
In short, the accident was Cuthbertson’s fault; he was to blame for
causing the accident and therefore he should pay.
Corrective justice is built on two key elements – fault and causation.
A defendant is liable to make good a claimant’s losses because
they (a) factually caused the claimant to suffer those losses
and (b) were to blame in so acting.
Corrective justice seems to provide a fairly good account of the typical
tort claim, and for the most part, defendant is liable in the aw of tort
only where they caused the claimants loss and they were at fault for
doing so.
However, sometimes the application of corrective justice may not be
so clear.
For example, there may not be a clear or single answer for
who is to blame for the claimant’s injuries.
- Compensation:
o Another argument from this case is that tort law should provide
compensation
In the majority of tort cases, corrective justice is achieved by requiring
the defendant to compensate the claimant for the losses they have
caused them.
This may make it appear that corrective justice and
compensation are effectively synonymous, but that is not
quite right.
While corrective justice often requires the payment of compensation,
is does so only where the defendant is morally and legally responsible
for the claimant’s loss.
This seems to impose significant limits on the role of tort law
as a means for compensating losses. If tort law is simply about
‘doing’ corrective justice, then it can do nothing to remedy
The benefits of buying summaries with Stuvia:
Guaranteed quality through customer reviews
Stuvia customers have reviewed more than 700,000 summaries. This how you know that you are buying the best documents.
Quick and easy check-out
You can quickly pay through credit card or Stuvia-credit for the summaries. There is no membership needed.
Focus on what matters
Your fellow students write the study notes themselves, which is why the documents are always reliable and up-to-date. This ensures you quickly get to the core!
Frequently asked questions
What do I get when I buy this document?
You get a PDF, available immediately after your purchase. The purchased document is accessible anytime, anywhere and indefinitely through your profile.
Satisfaction guarantee: how does it work?
Our satisfaction guarantee ensures that you always find a study document that suits you well. You fill out a form, and our customer service team takes care of the rest.
Who am I buying these notes from?
Stuvia is a marketplace, so you are not buying this document from us, but from seller tiegansmith2002. Stuvia facilitates payment to the seller.
Will I be stuck with a subscription?
No, you only buy these notes for $3.88. You're not tied to anything after your purchase.
