Negligence

I. Introduction

- What is Negligence? Negligence is a legal concept that

involves a breach of duty, either by not doing something a
reasonable person would do or doing something an ordinary
person wouldn't.
- Negligence includes both not doing the right thing
(nonfeasance) and doing the wrong thing (misfeasance).
- It can harm both individuals and their belongings, leading to
lawsuits.
- Negligence cases hinge on the idea that someone had a duty
to be careful, and their failure to do so caused harm.

II. Elements of Negligence

A. Duty

- Duty and negligence are closely linked; negligence happens

when there's a neglect of the duty to be careful.
- No negligence exists without a breach of duty.
- The duty to be careful is the core of a negligence case.

B. Breach of Duty

- Negligence occurs when someone doesn't use reasonable

care or skill toward someone they owe this duty to.
- It's a breach of a positive duty, meaning they didn't meet the
care standard expected in similar situations.
C. Causation

- Negligence must be what caused harm to the plaintiff.

- The breach of duty has to be the direct reason for the harm.

D. Injury or Damages

- In a negligence case, the plaintiff must have suffered harm

due to the defendant's breach of duty, whether to themselves
or their property.

- In a suit for negligence, the burden of proof lies with the

plaintiff who alleges negligence.
- To succeed in a negligence action, the plaintiff must
establish five crucial elements.

Five Essential Elements of a Suit for Negligence

II. Five Essential Elements of a Suit for Negligence

A. Legal Duty
- The defendant must have a legal duty to exercise care and
skill.
 B. Duty Towards Plaintiff
- The duty must be specific to the plaintiff.

C. Breach of Duty
- The defendant must have failed to meet their duty of due
care and skill.

D. Causation
- The breach of duty must directly cause the damage
complained of.

E. Damage
- Harm must result from the breach of duty.

Res Ipsa Loquitur in Negligence Cases

I. Introduction
- Res Ipsa Loquitur is a legal doctrine that applies in
negligence cases when the plaintiff can prove the accident but
cannot show how it happened.
- It allows the plaintiff to establish a presumption of
negligence based on the maxim, "Res ipsa loquitur," which
means "the thing speaks for itself."

II. Application of Res Ipsa Loquitur

A. Prima Facie Evidence of Negligence
1. Res Ipsa Loquitur creates a presumption of negligence
when the cause of the accident was apparently under the
control of the defendant or their servants.
2. The accident itself becomes reasonable evidence of
negligence under specific circumstances.
 B. Three Essential Requirements for Res Ipsa Loquitur
1. The thing causing the damage must be under the control
of the defendant or their servants.
2. The accident must be such that, in the ordinary course of
things, it would not have happened without negligence.
3. There must be no evidence of the actual cause of the
accident.

Contributory Negligence of the Plaintiff:

- Contributory negligence is a defense in negligence cases.
- It involves the plaintiff's own negligence contributing to
their injury.
- Recovery may be denied when the plaintiff's negligence is
the immediate cause of harm.
- Exceptions exist where contributory negligence doesn't
apply.

Vis Major (Act of God)

I. Introduction
- Vis major, also known as the act of God, refers to natural
events that are direct, violent, sudden, and irresistible.
- These events could not have been foreseen through human
foresight or resisted through human care and skill.

II. Definition and Examples

A. Definition
- Vis major involves acts of nature unconnected with
human agency or other causes, making them unforeseeable
and uncontrollable by human efforts.

B. Examples
1. Storm: A violent storm that causes significant damage
and is beyond human anticipation or prevention.
2. Tempest: Sudden and severe tempests that cannot be
foreseen or mitigated.
3. Lightning: Extraordinary lightning strikes that lead to
unforeseeable consequences.
4. Extraordinary Fall of Rain: Abnormal and heavy rainfall
that exceeds reasonable expectations.
5. Extraordinary High Tide: Unpredictable and extreme
high tides.
6. Extraordinary Severe Frost: Exceptional and severe frost
that cannot be prevented.

INEVITABLE ACCIDENT

A. Definition
- Inevitable accident is an accident or misfortune that
occurs due to circumstances that are not within the control of
the defendant and could not have been anticipated or avoided
under ordinary circumstances.

B. Illustration
- A scenario involving an accident caused by unpredictable
and uncontrollable external factors, which makes it impossible
for the defendant to prevent the incident.
 1. Strict Liability in Tort Law

I. Introduction
- The principle of strict liability in tort law, originating from
the landmark case of Rylands v Fletcher (1868), established
the concept that individuals can be held liable for damages
caused by hazardous substances escaping from their premises,
regardless of negligence.

II. Rylands v Fletcher Case

A. Facts
- Defendant (F) had a mill on his land and constructed a
reservoir for its operation.
- An accident caused water from the reservoir to flood coal
mines owned by the plaintiff (R).

B. Ruling
- The court held that the defendant was strictly liable for
the accident and escape of material due to the reservoir he
constructed, even without negligence.

III. Essentials of Strict Liability

A. Dangerous Substances
- Strict liability applies when "dangerous" substances
escape, posing a threat of harm or mischief.
- Examples include explosives, toxic gases, and electricity.

B. Escape
- The substance must escape from the premises and be
beyond the defendant's control after escaping.
- An escape results in liability, while no escape means no
liability.

C. Non-natural Use
- Strict liability requires a non-natural use of land, which
increases danger to others.
- In Rylands v Fletcher, using the reservoir to power a mill
was considered non-natural.

D. Simultaneous Fulfillment
- All three conditions (dangerous substances, escape, non-
natural use) must be satisfied for strict liability to apply.

IV. Exceptions to the Rule of Strict Liability

A. Plaintiff's Fault
- If the plaintiff's own actions cause the damage while
coming in contact with a dangerous substance, the defendant
is not liable.

B. Act of God
- Events beyond human control, caused by natural reasons,
lead to liability exemption.
- Such acts are unforeseen and unpreventable even with
caution.

C. Act of a Third Party

- When damages result from the actions of a third party not
under the defendant's control or contract, the defendant is not
liable.
- Foreseeable acts by third parties require due care.

D. Consent of the Plaintiff

- If the plaintiff consents to a situation where a dangerous
substance may cause damage, the defendant is not liable.
 - Shared resources among neighbors are an example.

V. Conclusion
- Strict liability in tort law holds individuals responsible for
damages caused by hazardous substances escaping from their
premises, irrespective of negligence.
- Exceptions to this rule, such as plaintiff's fault, acts of God,
third-party actions, and plaintiff consent, ensure a fair and
balanced application of the principle.

2. ABSOLUTE LIABILITY IN TORT LAW

I. Introduction
- Absolute liability, a concept evolving from strict liability,
imposes liability without exceptions for inherently dangerous
activities. In India, the principle of absolute liability was
established in the case of MC Mehta v Union of India.

II. MC Mehta v Union of India Case

A. Facts
- Oleum gas leaked from an industry in Delhi, resulting in
harm to numerous individuals.

B. Ruling
- The Supreme Court introduced the rule of absolute
liability, making the defendant liable for damages without
considering exceptions to strict liability.

III. Rule of Absolute Liability

A. Inherently Dangerous Activities
 - Absolute liability applies when a person is engaged in
inherently dangerous or hazardous activities.
- Harm caused during the course of such activities leads to
absolute liability without exception.

B. Exceptionless Liability
- Absolute liability disregards exceptions to the strict
liability rule.
- No exemption is granted even when the exceptions are
typically applicable.

IV. Application in Bhopal Gas Tragedy

- The rule established in MC Mehta v UOI was applied by
the Supreme Court in the Bhopal Gas Tragedy case,
emphasizing the importance of this principle in cases of
catastrophic industrial accidents.

V. Legislative Action
- In response to accidents involving absolute liability, the
Indian Legislature passed the Public Liability Insurance Act in
1991.
- This act ensures that victims of such accidents receive swift
relief through insurance.

VI. Conclusion
- The concept of absolute liability in tort law holds
individuals engaged in inherently dangerous activities
responsible for any harm caused, without exceptions.
- Its introduction and application in landmark cases highlight
its significance in ensuring accountability in cases of
industrial accidents.
Remedies Available in Case of Torts: Judicial Remedies
In the realm of tort law, three primary judicial remedies are
employed to address wrongs committed:

1. Damages

Damages refer to the monetary compensation awarded by

the court to the injured party.

- General Damage: This is the harm that the law presumes

to result from the tortious act. It does not require specific
evidence of loss in the given case.
- Special Damage: Special damage pertains to the actual,
quantifiable loss suffered by the plaintiff in a particular case.
In certain torts like seduction, slander, deceit, conspiracy,
waste, distress damage feasant, and property damage
nuisance, the law mandates the proof of special damage.
- Proximate Cause: In determining liability, the law
considers the immediate and proximate cause rather than
remote consequences. Liability is not extended to
unforeseeable, remote damages.
- Types of Damages: Damages can be categorized into:
1. Contemptuous Damages: Awarded when there is
technically a wrong, but the court believes the suit was
unwarranted under the circumstances.
2. Nominal Damages: Given to recognize a legal right of
the plaintiff, not as compensation.
3. Substantial Damages: Awarded to compensate the
plaintiff for the loss or damage resulting from the tort.
This is the most common form of damages.
4. Exemplary Damages (or punitive damages): Large
sums awarded by the court due to aggravating
circumstances surrounding the tort. This occurs, for
 example, when defamation is committed out of spite or
jealousy.
- Mental Shock: Damages can also be sought for illness
caused by nervous shock, even without physical impact or
injury. While formerly damages for mere mental pain or
sorrow were not recoverable, recent judicial trends allow such
claims.

2. Injunction
- An injunction is a court order restraining the defendant
from continuing, repeating, or commencing a wrongful act.
- Injunctions can be either mandatory (requiring a person to
perform a specific action) or prohibitive (preventing a person
from doing something).
- Injunctions can also be categorized as temporary
(applying for a specific period) or permanent (in effect
indefinitely).
- In India, permanent injunctions are governed by the
Specific Relief Act, while temporary injunctions are governed
by the Code of Civil Procedure.

3. Specific Restitution of Property

- This remedy is employed when the plaintiff has been
wrongly dispossessed of their land or goods.
- The court can order the defendant to return the property to
the rightful owner, thereby providing a remedy for cases of
wrongful possession or dispossession.

These judicial remedies serve the objectives of compensating

victims for tortious acts, preventing further harm, and
restoring property to its rightful owner. They offer a
comprehensive framework for addressing and resolving tort-
related grievances.
Here are brief and comprehensive notes on the topics you
provided:

1. Act of State:
- An act of State is an action injurious to a person or their
property who is not a subject of the state at the time of the act.
- It is done by a representative of the state's authority, either
civil or military, with prior authorization or subsequent
ratification by the Crown.
- It is typically an arbitrary act, done under sovereign power
and not under legal authority.
- Applies to aliens only, not British subjects.
- British subjects can seek remedies for wrongful acts even if
authorized by the Crown.

2. Judicial Acts:
- No lawsuit can be filed against a judge for actions or words
spoken in their judicial capacity.
- This principle aims to ensure judges can perform their
functions independently.
- Judicial immunity extends to other judicial bodies and
arbitrators.
- Appeals or criminal prosecutions address judicial errors or
corruption, not civil lawsuits.

3. Quasi-Judicial Acts:
- Persons or bodies with quasi-judicial powers are protected
from civil liability if they follow natural justice and relevant
rules.
- These entities should act in good faith, provide notice of
offenses, and offer an opportunity for defense.
- This applies to various institutions such as universities,
clubs, or societies.

4. Executive Acts:
- Executive officers may be liable for torts committed or
authorized by them.
- State officers are not liable if the wrongful act is considered
an act of the state.
- State is vicariously liable for torts committed by officers
unless they are traditional sovereign functions.
- Police officers are protected during the performance of their
executive duties.

5. Acts Done Under Parental or Quasi-Parental Authority:

- Parents and those in loco parentis can inflict moderate and
reasonable corporal punishment to correct a child's behavior.
- A schoolmaster has authority, similar to a parent, for the
welfare of the child, including disciplinary actions.

6. Authorities of Necessity:
- The master of a vessel has disciplinary powers, including the
authority to inflict moderate punishment on the crew and
passengers for safety and discipline.
- This power is based on necessity, often exercised in high
seas or foreign ports.

7. Necessity:
- The welfare of the community can take precedence over
individual rights in cases of necessity.
- Individuals may take actions for the public good, even if
they cause harm to others.
- Examples include extinguishing fires, driving away pests,
and using force to prevent accidents.

Here are brief and comprehensive notes on the topics you

requested:

8. ACTS DONE UNDER STATUTORY AUTHORITY

(ACTS AUTHORISED BY STATUTE):
- When the Legislature authorizes an act, no action can be
maintained for that act. The injured party has no remedy
unless provided by the statute itself.
- If the statute directs an act to be done in all events, the right
of action is taken away.
- If the statute's terms are permissive, the powers given must
respect the common rights of others.
- Statutory authority doesn't shield from liability if it leads to a
nuisance or harm to others.
- Courts evaluate whether the actions were within the
statutory authority.

9. LEAVE AND LICENCE (VOLUNTI NON FIT

INJURIA):
- Volenti non fit injuria means that one can't sue for a tort
if they have expressly or impliedly consented to it.
- Consent applies to intentional acts or running the risk of
accidental harm due to negligence.
- Consent must be based on knowledge of the risk and must be
voluntary.
- It doesn't apply to unlawful acts or breaches of statutory
duty.
- The maxim doesn't protect against actions involving gross
negligence or deliberate harm.

10. INEVITABLE ACCIDENT (ACT OF GOD):

- Inevitable accidents are those that can't be prevented by
ordinary care, caution, and skill.
- These accidents can result from forces of nature (acts of
God) or human factors.
- Exercising lawful rights for lawful purposes is not a tort,
even if it causes damage.
- Legal use of property may cause harm to others, but it's not
actionable.
- The focus is on physical unavoidability and proportionate
means.

11. MISTAKE OF FACT:

- A mistake of fact isn't an excuse for a tort, except when it's
an essential part of the wrong.
- The focus is on the motive and intention behind the
wrongful act.
- Mistakes of fact may not be a defense in tort, as opposed to
criminal law.
- It doesn't apply to all cases, and there can be exceptions.

12. EXERCISE OF COMMON RIGHTS:

- The exercise of ordinary rights for a lawful purpose and in a
lawful manner isn't a wrong, even if it causes harm.
- Competition in business, protecting property, and using one's
land are examples.
- The means used must be reasonable and proportionate.

13. PRIVATE DEFENCE:

- Everyone has the right to defend themselves and their
property against unlawful harm.
- The force used must be proportionate to the threat.
- Necessity must be proven, and the defense may not apply if
the plaintiff's actions were unlawful.

14. PLAINTIFF A WRONG-DOER:

- If a plaintiff's actions are connected to the harm suffered,
and they were themselves wrongdoers, they may not recover
damages.
- The defense is based on the principle that an immoral cause
doesn't give rise to an action.
- Application can be challenging and may depend on the
specific circumstances.

15. ACTS CAUSING SLIGHT HARM:

- The law does not concern itself with trifles (de minimis non
curat lex).
- It doesn't address negligible or insignificant harm.
- Only substantial harm to legal rights is actionable.