Skip to main content

DEFENCES AGAINST TORTIOUS LIABILITY

 What are General Defences in Torts?

When a plaintiff brings an action against the defendant for a particular tort or violation of legal right, resulting in legal damages, and successfully proves the essentials of a tort, the defendant is held liable.

However few exceptions are there in which the defendant can plead some defences which can help him in absolving from liabilities.

Private Defence

Among the general defences in tort, private defence is the most common. When a defendant tries to protect his body or property or any other person’s property, harms another person by using reasonable force, under an imminent-danger and where there is no time to report instantly to the authority, it is Private Defence. The harm done should be proportional according to the nature of the circumstances.

Essentials

Imminent Danger

There should be an immediate threat over the life or property of the defendant or another person’s property in which there is no time to report to the nearest authority. If the defendant is not able to contact that specific authority, then he can start the private defence.

Proportional Force

The defendant should apply a reasonable force. It should not be in excess of what is required.

Eg. If a thief breaks into the defendant’s personal property and tries to injure the defendant by beating him with a rod, then the defendant should tackle the thief using proportional force. If he is using a shotgun, then he can fire it on thief’s legs instead of his chest/forehead or it would be unreasonable.

 

Necessity

‘Necessity knows no law’. In order to avoid or prevent a great loss or harm, a defendant can cause lesser harm that is justified. The act of the defendant may be not legal but if it is to avoid major damage then he can plead this defence.

Essentials

  • When the defendant acts to avoid a significant risk of harm.

  • His causing of harm should be justified.

 

Necessity

‘Necessity knows no law’. In order to avoid or prevent a great loss or harm, a defendant can cause lesser harm that is justified. The act of the defendant may be not legal but if it is to avoid major damage then he can plead this defence.

Essentials

  • When the defendant acts to avoid a significant risk of harm.

  • His causing of harm should be justified.

 

 

Act of God

A very unusual act or an event which is the result of the natural forces such as earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, floods, droughts, etc. is coined as Act of God or ‘Vis major’. It is beyond human imagination and could not be prevented by human intervention.

Essentials

  • The act should result from a natural force.

  • No human intervention.

  • Extraordinary in nature.

 

Statutory Authority

Another general defence is statutory Authority. If an act is sanctioned by a statutory enactment or a law passed by the legislature, then the defendant cannot be held liable for the damages resulting in the course of such an act.

Volenti Non Fit injuria

In volenti non fit injuria, if a plaintiff has consented to a wrongful act with free content, either express or implied, under no pressure of fraud or coercion, with voluntary acceptance of risk, then he has no right to sue the defendant. Also, there should be a duty on behalf of others.
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Understanding Counterclaims: A Comprehensive Guide

  Understanding Counterclaims: A Comprehensive Guide In legal proceedings, a counterclaim is a vital tool that allows defendants to assert their own claims against the plaintiff. This strategic maneuver not only defends against the plaintiff's allegations but also enables defendants to seek their own relief. In this comprehensive guide, we delve into the intricacies of counterclaims, exploring their purpose, procedures, and implications in various legal contexts. Introduction to Counterclaims Definition A counterclaim is a legal claim brought by a defendant against the plaintiff in response to the plaintiff's initial complaint. It serves as a means for defendants to assert their own rights, defenses, or causes of action arising from the same transaction or occurrence as the plaintiff's claim. Purpose The primary purpose of a counterclaim is to allow defendants to present their side of the story and seek appropriate remedies or relief. By filing a counterclaim, defendants ca...
6 comments
Read more

Title: Understanding "Your Complaint has been Disposed under a Closed Complaint"

  Title: Understanding "Your Complaint has been Disposed under a Closed Complaint" When you receive a notification stating "Your complaint has been disposed under a closed complaint," it signifies the closure of the complaint you filed with the respective entity or organization. This phrase is commonly used by customer service departments, grievance redressal cells, regulatory bodies, or complaint management systems to inform complainants about the resolution status of their complaint. Here's a detailed explanation of what it means and its implications: Disposition of Complaint (0-7 days) : "Disposed" indicates that the complaint has been addressed, reviewed, and resolved by the concerned authority or entity. The closure of the complaint signifies that the responsible party has taken appropriate action to address the issues raised in the complaint. Closure Status (0-7 days) : "Closed complaint" indicates that the complaint resolution process ...
4 comments
Read more

The Doctrine of Alternative Danger

  THE DOCTRINE OF ALTERNATIVE DANGER Although the plaintiff is supposed to be cautious in spite of the defendant’s Negligence, there can also be certain situations when the plaintiff is justified in taking some threat where some unsafe state of affairs has been created by way of the defendant. The plaintiff may appear as puzzled or worried through a hazardous state of affairs created via the defendant and to store his man or woman or property, or now and again to store a third party from such danger, he may take a choice risk. The law, therefore, lets in the plaintiff to come across a choice danger to shop by himself from the chance created via the defendant. If the path adopted by him results in some harm to himself, his motion in opposition to the defendant will now not fail. The judgment of the plaintiff, however, is not rash. The position can be defined by means of the case of Jones v . Boyce . In that case, the plaintiff used to be a passenger in the defendant’s train and inst...
10 comments
Read more