Skip to main content

LAW OF TORTS

Tortious liability

Injuria sine damno

Ashby v white

Damnum sine injuria 

Case laws

Gloucester grammar school

Mogul steam ships v mcgror

Usha Ben v Chitra mandir 


Vicarious liability

Principal and agent

Master and servant 

Third party contractor 

Absolute liability

Defamation

MGM pictures v mohamyoussoup

Ramjeth melani v subramaniya sami 

Slander and libel 

Innuendo 

Defence

Absolute privilege 

Case laws

Ramjeth Melani v subramaniyaswami

Negligence

Contributory negligence 

Remoteness of damage 

Trespass

Nuisance - private and public

Assault and battery 

Liability of dangerous chattels  

Liability of animals

 Scienter rule

Case law 

Behren birram circus

 Cattle trepass 

 Ordinary liability in cup 

Trespass to goods

 Detenue 

 Conversion 

Interference with contract or business

 Conspiracy 

 Mogul steam ships case

 Passing off

General defence 

 Volenti non fit injuria  

  Hall v brooks auto racing club

Padmavati v dugganaika

Woolridge v sumner

Lakshmi Rajan v malar hospitals

Smith v baker 

Dan v hamilton 

  Haynes v harwood

Wagner v internationl railway 

 Inevitable accident

  Stanley v powell

Shirdhar Tiwari v u.p state transport corporation 

 Holmes v mather 

Brown v kendall

Two dogs were fighting and the defendant tries to separate the dogs using a stick and by mistake hits the palintiff s eye who was watching the scene

This is a mere inevitable accident the defendant is not liable 

Nitroglycerin case 

National coal board v evans

Act of god


Necessity 

Bird v holbrook

Cope v sharpe 

Statutory authority 

Vaughan v taff valde rail co

Smith v London south western railway 

Absolute liability 

Bhopal disaster case

M.c mehta v union of India 

Liability for animals

Ferae naturae - keeping dangerous animals 

Behren v briram circus 

Mayi Gowda v state of Karnataka 

State of Himachal pradhesh v halli devi 

Mansuetae naturae - not dangerous 

Cattle trespas 




 



Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Right to passage

The international law does not clearly define the control of the right to passage. Even though if defined who could exercise control over the passsge is the question  The strait of Hormuz now blocked by the country of iran is widely condemned by the United Nations What could be reason is it really war or anything else for the condemning nations  First was this opposed by the Russia china and India? What could be the reasons whether is this the only war that affects the lives of people or the lives of people was immaterial in earlier and on going wars . Was Iran doing the right thing by blocking the strait of hormuz , any nations who s threatened could defend themselves but is the Real defence mechanism  What is the strait jacket formula in war . Ukraine and Russia was into war for the last two years was anyone worried other than the two  anyhow the only affected would the civilians in the war and not the heads so many battered displaced does it even matter ? Put your...
Post a Comment
Read more

Maintenance for wife /children

The question here would be whether the wife is entitled to maintenance even after divorce ? Is she entitled to maintenance after mutual consent? Does the children born out of the wedlock is entitled to maintenance? These questions are answered here This is applicable to all women irrespective of religion. The wife can claim maintenance even after divorce until she is remarried. The children is entitled to maintenance . More check crpc 125. For further details consultant your advocate .
Post a Comment
Read more

Witness

 Who are competent witness 1 any body can be a witness if they can understand the question put forward and answer the question I respect of age and if he a lunatic he is not prevented from giving witness  2. Accomplice  The person who would be the co accused whom might I in turn change as approver  Is the witness a credit worthy witness or he has given the witness due to coersion  The prosecution must prove that based on independent and material evidence rather the conviction merely on accomplice witness  The question would be in case of rape there is no accomplice   The victim is the witness why not unless and until if the victim is it married and of tender age. Post your thought and comments .
Post a Comment
Read more