Winfield and Jolowicz on Tort

  1. Home
  2. Docs
  3. LSE
  4. LSE Law School
  5. Winfield and Jolowicz on Tort

Winfield and Jolowicz on Tort


Goudkamp, J. (2020). Winfield and Jolowicz on Tort (20th ed.). Thomson Reuters.

Chapter Summary

General Introduction
The introduction provides an overview of tort law, its aims, definition, and domain. It discusses the distinction between tort and other branches of law such as contract, unjust enrichment, equitable wrongs, bailment, and crime. The chapter also touches on the compensation culture and criticisms of the tort system, particularly in the context of personal injury and death.

Chapter 1: The Aims, Definition, and Domain of Tort Law
This chapter outlines the purposes of tort law, including deterrence, compensation, and justice. It defines tortious liability and differentiates it from contractual and equitable liabilities. It also explores concurrent liability, the relationship between tort and other sources of compensation, and various criticisms of the tort system.

Chapter 2: Influences on Tort Law
Examines historical and contemporary influences on tort law, including the impact of the European Convention on Human Rights and the Human Rights Act. It discusses the potential for a European tort law and the structural framework of the book.

Chapter 3: Foundational Concepts
Covers fundamental concepts such as volition, intention, negligence, strict liability, motive, and malice. These principles are the building blocks for understanding more complex tort doctrines.

Chapter 4: Intentional Interference with the Person
Details torts involving intentional harm, including battery, assault, false imprisonment, and acts intended to cause physical harm. The chapter also discusses the Protection from Harassment Act 1997.

Chapter 5: Negligence—Duty of Care
Provides a comprehensive overview of the duty of care in negligence, tracing its historical development through key cases and periods, including Donoghue v Stevenson, Anns v Merton, and Caparo Industries plc v Dickman. The chapter also addresses specific problems in duty of care, such as omissions, relationships, dangerous situations, and assumptions of responsibility.

Chapter 6: Negligence—Breach of Duty
Analyzes the breach of duty, focusing on the reasonable person standard, the application of the standard of care, and the proof of negligence.

Chapter 7: Negligence—Damage, Causation, and Remoteness
Explores the concepts of damage, causation, and remoteness in negligence cases. It discusses personal injury, property damage, loss of a chance, factual causation, and legal causation, including multiple causation and intervening acts.

Chapter 8: Breach of Statutory Duty and Misfeasance in Public Office
Examines the tort of breach of statutory duty, including the nature and elements of the action. It also covers misfeasance in public office, highlighting the legal principles and relevant case law.

Chapter 9: Employers’ Liability
Focuses on the liability of employers for injuries sustained by employees. It discusses the employer’s duty of care, statutory and common law obligations, and the standard of care expected.

Chapter 10: Liability for Land and Structures
Covers the liability of occupiers and non-occupiers for injuries on their premises. It includes discussions on the Occupiers’ Liability Acts 1957 and 1984, liability to trespassers, and the responsibilities of landlords and builders.

Chapter 11: Liability for Defective Products
Explores product liability at common law and under the Consumer Protection Act 1987. It discusses the nature of defects, the parties liable, and the defenses available.

Chapter 12: Liability for Statements
Examines liability for deceit and negligent misstatement, focusing on the requirements for proving a false representation, fraudulent intent, and the special relationship needed for negligent misstatement claims.

Chapter 13: Defamation, Privacy, and Related Matters
Details the tort of defamation, including what constitutes a defamatory statement, defenses, and remedies. The chapter also covers privacy torts, the impact of the Human Rights Act 1998, and the Data Protection Act 2018.

Chapter 14: Trespass to Land
Defines trespass to land and discusses the elements required for the tort, defenses, and remedies available to claimants.

Chapter 15: Nuisance
Covers public and private nuisance, detailing the elements of the tort, defenses, and remedies. It also discusses the rule in Rylands v Fletcher and its application to liability for dangerous substances.

Chapter 16: The Rule in Rylands v Fletcher
Explains the rule in Rylands v Fletcher, outlining its requirements, defenses, and applications. The chapter also addresses liability for fires and animals.

Chapter 17: Liability for Animals
Examines the liability for harm caused by animals, differentiating between dangerous species and other animals. It discusses statutory provisions and common law principles governing this area.

Chapter 18: Interference with Goods
Details torts related to goods, including trespass to goods, conversion, and detinue. The chapter covers the requirements for these torts, defenses, and remedies available.

Chapter 19: Intentional Interference with Economic Interests
Focuses on economic torts such as inducing breach of contract, unlawful means tort, and conspiracy. It discusses the elements required to establish these torts, defenses, and relevant case law.

Chapter 20: Abuse of Legal Procedure
Covers torts related to the misuse of legal processes, including malicious prosecution, malicious civil proceedings, and abuse of process. The chapter outlines the elements of these torts and significant case law.

Chapter 21: Vicarious Liability
Explains vicarious liability, detailing the relationships that give rise to such liability, the connection between the relationship and the tort, and the implications for employers and principals.

Chapter 22: Joint and Several Tortfeasors
Discusses the principles governing multiple tortfeasors, including the distinction between joint and several liability, contribution among tortfeasors, and relevant statutory provisions.

Chapter 23: Remedies
Examines the remedies available in tort law, including various types of damages (compensatory, punitive, aggravated, nominal), injunctions, and specific restitution. The chapter also covers the principles for assessing damages and the impact of contributory negligence.

Chapter 24: Death in Relation to Tort
Addresses the impact of death on tort claims, including survival of actions, fatal accidents, and the types of damages recoverable.

Chapter 25: Capacity
Covers the capacity of various parties to sue and be sued in tort, including minors, corporations, partners, clubs, and individuals with unsound mind. It discusses the legal implications and relevant case law.

Chapter 26: Defenses
Details the defenses available in tort claims, including consent, exclusion of liability, voluntary assumption of risk, necessity, self-defense, statutory authority, and public policy defenses. The chapter also discusses excuses and denials of responsibility.

This chapter summary provides an overview of the comprehensive coverage of tort law in “Winfield and Jolowicz on Tort” by James Goudkamp, offering insights into the key topics and legal principles covered in the text.

Key Concepts

1. Duty of Care:
The duty of care is a foundational concept in negligence. It requires individuals and entities to act with a standard of care to avoid causing harm to others. This concept was famously articulated in Donoghue v Stevenson (1932), which established the “neighbor principle” – individuals must take reasonable care to avoid acts or omissions that could foreseeably harm their “neighbors” (those directly affected by their actions).

2. Breach of Duty:
A breach of duty occurs when an individual or entity fails to meet the standard of care expected in a given situation. The standard is typically that of the “reasonable person.” Various factors influence whether a breach has occurred, including the likelihood and severity of potential harm, the cost and feasibility of precautions, and the benefits of the defendant’s conduct. Bolam v Friern Hospital Management Committee (1957) is significant for establishing that professionals are judged against the standards of their profession.

3. Causation:
Causation in tort law involves linking the defendant’s breach of duty to the harm suffered by the claimant. Factual causation is often determined using the “but-for” test, asking whether the harm would have occurred but for the defendant’s actions. Legal causation, or remoteness, considers whether the harm was a foreseeable consequence of the breach. Barnett v Chelsea & Kensington Hospital Management Committee (1969) illustrates the application of these principles.

4. Defenses in Tort Law:
Defendants can raise various defenses to mitigate or eliminate liability in tort claims. Common defenses include:

  • Volenti Non Fit Injuria (Consent): Claimants who consent to the risk of harm cannot later claim for damages (as in Morris v Murray (1991)).
  • Contributory Negligence: Claimants who contribute to their own harm may have their damages reduced proportionately (as in Froom v Butcher (1976)).
  • Illegality (Ex Turpi Causa Non Oritur Actio): Claimants involved in illegal activities cannot recover damages for injuries related to those activities (as in Pitts v Hunt (1991)).

5. Vicarious Liability:
Vicarious liability holds employers or principals liable for the tortious acts of their employees or agents when these acts occur within the scope of employment or authority. This principle ensures that those who benefit from the activities of their employees also bear the risks. Lister v Hesley Hall Ltd (2002) demonstrated the application of vicarious liability in cases of criminal acts by employees.

6. Occupiers’ Liability:
Occupiers’ liability pertains to the duty of care owed by those in control of premises to visitors. The Occupiers’ Liability Act 1957 outlines the duty owed to lawful visitors, while the Occupiers’ Liability Act 1984 covers duties to trespassers. British Railways Board v Herrington (1972) significantly influenced the development of this area by recognizing a duty of care even to trespassers under certain circumstances.

7. Product Liability:
Product liability involves holding manufacturers and sellers accountable for defective products that cause harm. The Consumer Protection Act 1987 imposes strict liability on producers for defective products, regardless of negligence. Donoghue v Stevenson (1932) laid the foundation for modern product liability by establishing that manufacturers owe a duty of care to consumers.

8. Defamation:
Defamation law protects individuals’ reputations from unjustified harm through false statements. To establish defamation, claimants must prove that the statement is defamatory, refers to them, and has been published to a third party. Defenses include truth, honest opinion, and privilege. Reynolds v Times Newspapers Ltd (2001) introduced the “Reynolds privilege,” offering protection for responsible journalism on matters of public interest.

9. Privacy:
The tort of misuse of private information protects individuals’ privacy rights against unauthorized disclosure of personal information. Campbell v MGN Ltd (2004) was pivotal in recognizing and delineating the boundaries of this tort, balancing privacy rights with freedom of expression.

10. Remedies in Tort Law:
Remedies aim to compensate the claimant for their losses and restore them, as much as possible, to their pre-tort position. Types of remedies include:

  • Compensatory Damages: For pecuniary (economic) and non-pecuniary (non-economic) losses.
  • Aggravated and Exemplary Damages: To address particularly egregious conduct and deter future wrongdoing.
  • Nominal Damages: Symbolic compensation for a tort without substantial loss.
  • Injunctions: Orders to prevent ongoing or future harm.

11. Nuisance:
Nuisance involves the unlawful interference with a person’s use or enjoyment of land. Private nuisance requires proof of substantial and unreasonable interference, while public nuisance affects the rights of the public or a community. Cambridge Water Co v Eastern Counties Leather plc (1994) highlights the importance of foreseeability in nuisance claims.

12. Economic Torts:
Economic torts protect against wrongful interference with economic interests. Key examples include inducing breach of contract, unlawful means tort, and conspiracy. OBG Ltd v Allan (2007) clarified the elements of these torts, emphasizing the need for intention and unlawful conduct.

13. Breach of Statutory Duty:
A tortious action can arise from the breach of a statutory duty if the statute is intended to confer a right of action for breach. The elements include the existence of a statutory duty, breach of that duty, and resultant harm. Groves v Lord Wimborne (1898) exemplifies this type of claim.

14. Misfeasance in Public Office:
This tort addresses deliberate and unlawful conduct by public officers causing harm. It requires proof of bad faith, abuse of power, and the foreseeability of harm. Three Rivers District Council v Bank of England (2000) provides an example of its application.

These key concepts provide a comprehensive understanding of the foundational principles and specific doctrines that govern tort law, illustrating its application and impact in various contexts.

Critical Analysis

1. Evolution and Flexibility of Tort Law:
Tort law’s ability to evolve in response to societal changes is both a strength and a challenge. The expansion of negligence to encompass psychiatric harm, economic loss, and the development of new torts such as misuse of private information demonstrate its flexibility. However, this evolution can lead to uncertainties and inconsistencies, as courts balance traditional principles with modern realities.

2. Policy Considerations:
Policy considerations heavily influence the development and application of tort law. Courts often consider the broader implications of their decisions, such as promoting public safety, deterring wrongful conduct, and ensuring fair compensation. For instance, the strict liability regime in product liability reflects a policy choice to protect consumers and incentivize manufacturers to ensure product safety.

3. Duty of Care:
The concept of duty of care remains one of the most debated areas in tort law. Establishing a duty of care involves assessing foreseeability, proximity, and whether it is fair, just, and reasonable to impose a duty. The Caparo Industries plc v Dickman (1990) case highlighted the complexities and limitations of formulating a universal test for duty of care. Recent cases like Robinson v Chief Constable of West Yorkshire Police (2018) illustrate the ongoing evolution and challenges in this area.

4. Causation and Remoteness:
Establishing causation and determining the remoteness of damage are critical yet complex aspects of tort law. The “but-for” test and the concept of proximate cause can sometimes lead to contentious outcomes, especially in cases with multiple contributing factors. The Fairchild v Glenhaven Funeral Services Ltd (2002) case, which dealt with causation in mesothelioma claims, underscores the difficulties and need for judicial flexibility in complex causation scenarios.

5. Remedies and Compensation:
The effectiveness and adequacy of remedies in tort law are subject to ongoing debate. While compensatory damages aim to restore claimants to their pre-tort position, the assessment and quantification of these damages can be contentious. The introduction of aggravated and exemplary damages addresses particularly egregious conduct but raises questions about their appropriate scope and application. Additionally, the principle of mitigation and the rules surrounding contributory negligence further complicate the assessment of damages.

6. Defenses in Tort Law:
The availability and scope of defenses play a crucial role in balancing the interests of claimants and defendants. Defenses like contributory negligence, consent, and illegality reflect policy choices about personal responsibility and fairness. However, these defenses can sometimes lead to harsh results, particularly for vulnerable claimants. The evolving jurisprudence around defenses highlights the ongoing tension between protecting claimants and ensuring just outcomes for defendants.

7. Human Rights Influence:
The integration of human rights principles into tort law has significantly influenced its development. The Human Rights Act 1998 has prompted courts to consider privacy rights, freedom of expression, and other fundamental rights in their decisions. This influence is evident in cases like Campbell v MGN Ltd (2004), which balanced privacy rights against freedom of expression, demonstrating the impact of human rights on tort doctrines.

8. Vicarious Liability:
The doctrine of vicarious liability has seen significant developments, particularly in its application to non-traditional employment relationships and intentional torts. The extension of vicarious liability to relationships “akin to employment” in cases like Various Claimants v Catholic Child Welfare Society (2012) reflects the courts’ willingness to adapt the doctrine to changing employment practices. However, these expansions raise concerns about the limits of vicarious liability and its impact on employers.

9. Economic Torts:
Economic torts, such as inducing breach of contract and unlawful means tort, protect economic interests but pose challenges in defining their scope and elements. The requirement of intention and the nature of unlawful means are areas of particular complexity. The OBG Ltd v Allan (2007) case clarified some aspects but also highlighted the need for ongoing judicial refinement to balance protection against economic harm with freedom of competition.

10. Comparative Perspectives:
Comparative analysis of tort law across different jurisdictions reveals varying approaches and the influence of cultural, economic, and legal factors. For instance, the US’s broad application of punitive damages contrasts with the UK’s more conservative approach. These comparisons can inform potential reforms and highlight the strengths and weaknesses of different legal systems. They also underscore the importance of context in shaping tort doctrines and outcomes.

Real-World Applications and Examples

1. Medical Negligence:
Medical negligence cases illustrate the application of duty of care, breach, and causation principles. For example, in Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority (1997), the court considered the standard of care owed by medical professionals and the importance of expert testimony in determining breach. This case highlights the complexities of establishing negligence in specialized fields.

2. Product Liability:
Product liability cases hold manufacturers accountable for defective products. The Donoghue v Stevenson (1932) case laid the foundation for modern product liability, establishing the principle that manufacturers owe a duty of care to consumers. The Consumer Protection Act 1987 further solidified these protections by imposing strict liability on producers for defective products.

3. Workplace Accidents:
Tort law plays a vital role in addressing workplace accidents, ensuring employers provide safe working conditions. The case of Barber v Somerset County Council (2004) illustrated how employers can be held liable for stress-related illnesses caused by excessive workload and inadequate support. This case underscores the importance of employers’ duty of care toward their employees.

4. Environmental Harm:
Environmental torts address harm caused by hazardous activities, often involving strict liability principles. The rule in Rylands v Fletcher (1868) imposes liability for the escape of dangerous substances. Modern applications include cases against corporations for pollution and environmental damage, highlighting the ongoing relevance of strict liability in protecting public and environmental interests.

5. Defamation:
Defamation law protects individuals’ reputations from unjustified harm. The Reynolds v Times Newspapers Ltd (2001) case introduced the “Reynolds privilege,” balancing the protection of reputation with the need for responsible journalism on matters of public interest. This case underscores the importance of freedom of expression while safeguarding individuals’ reputations.

6. Privacy and Data Protection:
The rise of digital technology has brought privacy torts to the forefront. In Campbell v MGN Ltd (2004), the court recognized the tort of misuse of private information, balancing privacy rights against freedom of expression. This case has significant implications for how personal information is handled and protected, reflecting the evolving nature of privacy in the digital age.

7. Public Nuisance:
Public nuisance cases address interference with public rights and interests. The case of Attorney General v PYA Quarries Ltd (1957) exemplifies how tort law can address widespread environmental harm affecting a community. This case highlights the role of public nuisance in protecting community interests and the environment.

8. Economic Loss:
Claims for pure economic loss are restricted in tort law, often requiring a special relationship between the parties. The Hedley Byrne & Co Ltd v Heller & Partners Ltd (1964) case established the principle that economic loss can be claimed if there is a negligent misstatement causing the loss, provided there is a special relationship creating a duty of care. This case illustrates the complexities of establishing liability for economic loss.

9. Vicarious Liability:
Vicarious liability holds employers liable for the torts committed by their employees during the course of employment. The case of Lister v Hesley Hall Ltd (2002) demonstrated this principle, where a boarding school was held vicariously liable for the sexual abuse committed by one of its employees. This case highlights the extent of employer liability for the wrongful acts of employees.

10. Trespass to Land:
Trespass to land involves unauthorized entry onto someone else’s property. The case of Entick v Carrington (1765) is a historical example, establishing that state officials could not enter private property without legal authority. This principle continues to influence modern trespass law, protecting property rights against unauthorized intrusions.

11. Road Traffic Accidents:
Tort law frequently deals with claims arising from road traffic accidents, where negligence by drivers leads to injury or damage. The case of Nettleship v Weston (1971) set a precedent by holding that learner drivers owe the same standard of care as experienced drivers. This case underscores the application of the reasonable person standard in road traffic accidents.

12. Professional Liability:
Professionals, such as lawyers, accountants, and architects, can be held liable for negligence in their professional duties. The case of Henderson v Merrett Syndicates Ltd (1995) extended the principle of liability to cases where professionals give negligent advice or services, resulting in economic loss to their clients. This case highlights the duty of care owed by professionals and the consequences of breaching that duty.

These real-world applications and examples illustrate the practical impact of tort law in various contexts, highlighting its role in providing remedies for harm, deterring wrongful conduct, and upholding justice in society.

Post a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *