liability in tort

This is similar to the modern concept of strict liability in tort.

If the problem appears to be a novel one, it may raise the theory of general liability in tort.

Civil laws cover contract and liability in tort.

Still, liability in tort will still be subject to an exemptions or conditions set out in a contract.

There would be direct liability in tort for the parent company if it had interfered in the subsidiary's affairs.

Section 2 imposes civil liability in tort for damage caused wholly or partly by a defect in a product.

Ninth Report (Liability in Tort between Husband and Wife).

Subsection (4) indicates that the liability for damages shall be in the nature of a liability in tort.

Section 13(1) conferred immunity from liability in tort for an act done by a person 'in contemplation or furtherance of a trade dispute'.

In contrast with the crime of conspiracy, an overt act causing damage is an essential element of liability in tort.

Others argue that while some limited liability is beneficial, the privilege ought not to extend to liability in tort for environmental disasters or personal injury.

He went on and said, if there had been no warranty (which there was) there would still be negligent misrepresentation liability in tort.

Fault of the defendant means negligence, breach of statutory duty or other act or omission which gives rise to a liability in tort.

Consent to medical treatment or consent to risky sports on the part of the claimant excludes liability in tort where that consent is informed consent.

"Natural uses of land," Mr. Horwitz states, were favored "by strict liability in tort: any interference with the property of another gave rise to liability."

In Donoghue v Stevenson in 1932 the House of Lords shaped a general theory of manufacturer's liability in tort for products.

The Act is concerned exclusively with "qualifying liability in tort" and affirms Parliament's view that fault based liability should remain the basis of compensation for clinical mishaps.

It permitted the development of broad concepts, such as liability in tort which could never have come about when confined by the old forms of action, such as trover.

It is perfectly lawful for one person acting alone to attempt this, but if it is two or more, then it suddenly becomes unlawful, and liability in tort follows.

With all of the exceptions in contract law, liability in contract is no longer very different from liability in tort, and the merging of damages is not far behind.

Liability in Tort arises if a mediator influences a party in any way (compromising the integrity of the decision), defames a party, breaches confidentiality, or most commonly, is negligent.

But despite strict liability in tort, civil remedies are in some instances insufficient to provide a deterrent to a company pursuing business practices that could seriously injure the life, health and environment of other people.

Corporations created in this way would not, however, be able to replicate the limit on liabilities arising non-contractually, such as liability in tort for environmental disasters or personal injury, which corporations currently enjoy.

Liability can arise for the mediator from Liability in Contract; Liability in Tort; and Liability for Breach of Fiduciary Obligations.

However, firms already have to face uncertainty in the context of UCTA and the criteria used to assess whether a duty of care which would give rise to liability in tort is owed.