n

n

n

n

n

n

n

Abstract

nUnder Tort it is very important to learn about the general defences. This article tells you about the eight fundamental defences used in Tort. It is general presumption of law that if your acts gives injury to anyone then you are liable to compensate them but this tortious liability or general defences gives immunity to defendant to escape her liability to compensate petitioner in certain situations and occasions. Therefore, this article explained various types of general defences available for defendant under Tort.n

n

n

n

Full Text

n

n

[foreach 379]n

n[/foreach]

u276e u276f

n

References

n[if 1104 equals=””]

1. (1932) 1 KB 205.
2. (1975) 1 KAM LJ 93
3. (1963) 2 QB 43
4. (1887) 18 QBD 685
5. 1998 CPJ 586.
6. (1888) 22 QBD 23.
7. (1923) 1 KB 340
8. (1891) AC 325
9. (1956) 2 ALL ER 625
10. (1936) 1 KB 146
11. (1921) 232 N.Y 176
12. (1828) 4
13. (1990) 3 All ER 344
14. 7 L.T.R 25
15. AIR 2001 Guwahati 18.
16. AIR 1971 Kerala 197
17. (1876) 2 EX. D 1
18. AIR 1958 MP 48
19. AIR 1984 MAD 103
20. 1973 QB 100
21. (1894) 1 QB 495
22. (1909) 26 T.L.R. 139
23. (1891) 1 K.B 496
24. (1860) 5 H. N ( 679)
25. (1870) LR 6 CP 14
26. (1881) 6 A.C 193.

n[/if 1104][if 1104 not_equal=””]n

[foreach 1102]n t
1. [if 1106 equals=””], [/if 1106][if 1106 not_equal=””],[/if 1106]

n[/foreach]

n[/if 1104]

n

n

n

Journal of Law of Torts and Consumer Protection Law

n

[if 344 not_equal=””]ISSN: 2583-3898[/if 344]

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

[if 1193 equals=””][else][/if] 

n [/foreach]n

[if 1181 equals=””][else][/if] 

n [/foreach]n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

Abstract

nTort law is the field of law in which courts give a remedy for private or civil wrongs or injuries by enabling a lawsuit for (often monetary) damages. Thus, the objective is to return the sufferer to his or her pre-injury state. It has been stated that India, the world’s biggest democracy, has a very undeveloped tort law. The majority of Indian tort law emerged after British occupation. Nonetheless, Hindu law, in its varied manifestations and evolutions, is the world’s oldest continuous legal system. For numerous millennia, Hinduism was India’s exclusive religion and legal system; it coexisted with Muslim and Christian legal systems in the previous millennia, but it remained culturally dominant and continues to apply to the majority of Indians to some extent now. When we consider the lengthy history of Hindu law in conjunction with India’s tremendous variety of culture, language, and even governmental systems throughout history, the issue becomes even more perplexing. Furthermore, the persistent underdevelopment of Indian tort law is unexpected in light of the Indian constitution’s strong dedication to both compassion and comprehensiveness, which was passed in 1950 (three years after independence from Britain). Tort law is supposed to have evolved from the ancient maxim Ubi jus ibi remedium (Every right needs a remedy). This paper examines whether Indians are endowed with less rights in this critical area and what are we to make of this underdevelopment in relation to a central issue in practically all legal systems i.e. how to restore the victim’s dignity and grant reparation, where any component of Indian civilization or culture that elucidates on this lacuna.n

n

n

n

Full Text

n

n

[foreach 379]n

n[/foreach]

u276e u276f

n

References

n[if 1104 equals=””]

1. OP Dwivedi, “Environmental Ethics: Our Dharma to the Environment” (Sanchar Publishing House, 1994) 169; Christopher K Chapple, ‘Hinduism, Jainsim, and Ecology’ 1998 (10:1) Earth Ethics. https://www.researchonline.mq.edu.au/vital/access/services/Download/mq:33186/SOURCE1.
2. Sushant Sailan, “History of the Removal of the Fundamental Right to Property”, (2002) Centre for Civil Society, 231–255. https://ccs.in/internship_papers/2002/25.pdf.
3. Bergkamp , G J Postema, “Risks Wrongs and Responsibility: Coleman’s Liberal Theory of Commutative Justice”, (1993) 103 Yale Law Journal 889. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3186639.
4. RA Epstien, “Simple Rules for a Complex World” (Harvard University Press, Cambridge, 17th February 1995) Page No 38. https://www.jstor.org/stable/764686?seq=1#metadata_ info_tab_contents.
5. J Gordley, “Tort Law in the Aristotelian Tradition” in Owen (ed), Philosophical Foundations of Tort Law (Oxford University Press, 1997) 157, 158; E J Weinrib, ‘Law as a Kantian Idea of Reason’ (1987) 87 Columbia Law Review 472. https://www.jstor.org/stable/24562818? seq=1#metadata_info_tab_contents.
6. GC Keating, “Fairness and Two Fundamental Questions in the Tort Law of Accidents: Olin Working Paper No 99–21” (University of Southern California Law School, Los Angles, 1999) 28, 61. https://www.corteidh.or.cr/tablas/r34960.pdf.
7. RH Coase, “Notes on the Problem of Social Cost’ in R H Coase, the Firm, The Market And The Law” (University of Chicago Press, 1990). https://go.gale.com/ps/i.do?id=GALE%7CA145572327&sid=googleScholar&v=2.1&it=r&linkaccess=abs&issn=02733072&p=AONE&sw=w.
8. RA Posner, “Wealth Maximisation and Tort Law: A Philosophical Inquiry” in D G Owen (ed), Philosophical Foundations of Tort Law (Oxford University Press, 1997). https://www.researchonline.mq.edu.au/vital/access/services/Download/mq:33186/SOURCE1.
9. Karl N Llewellyn, “The Bramble Bush: On Our Law and its Study”, (Oceana, Dobbs Ferry, 1960) 12 cited in Lucas Bergkamp, Environment and Liability (Kluwer Law International, 2001) 67. https://www.barnesandnoble.com/w/bramble-bush-karl-n-llewellyn/1101869215.
10. Guido Calabresi, “Concerning Cause and the Law of Torts: An Essay for Harry Kalven, Jr.” (1975) 43 University of Chicago Law Review 69, 105. https://www.jstor.org/stable/1599192.
11. C A E Goodhart, “Economics and the Law: Too Much One Way traffic?” (1997) 60 Modern Law Review 1, 13. https://www.jstor.org/stable/1097288.
12. MR Chertow and DC Esty (eds), “Thinking ecologically: an introduction” in MR Chertow and DC Esty (eds), “Thinking Ecologically: The Next Generation of Environmental Policy” (Yale University Press, New Haven, 1997) 1–16, in Bergkamp, above n 76, 73. https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-1-4020-6598-9_24.
13. Mark Sagoff, “The Economy of the Earth: Philosophy, Law and the Environment” (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1988). https://www.goodreads.com/en/book/show/1356962.
14. G Williams, “The Aims of the Law of Tort” (1951) 4 Current Legal Problems 137; Perry, Ronen “The Role of Retributive Justice in the Common Law of Torts: A Descriptive Theory” (2006) 73 Tennesse Law Review 177. https://ore.exeter.ac.uk/repository/bitstream/handle/10871/18742/FoxT.pdf;sequence=1.

n[/if 1104][if 1104 not_equal=””]n

[foreach 1102]n t
1. [if 1106 equals=””], [/if 1106][if 1106 not_equal=””],[/if 1106]

n[/foreach]

n[/if 1104]

n

n

n

Journal of Law of Torts and Consumer Protection Law

n

[if 344 not_equal=””]ISSN: 2583-3898[/if 344]

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

[if 1193 equals=””][else][/if] 

n [/foreach]n

[if 1181 equals=””][else][/if] 

n [/foreach]n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

Abstract

nThis article discusses about the origin and development of law of torts. A tort is “a private or civil wrong or injury, including an action for bad faith and breach of contract, for which the court will provide a remedy in the form of an action for damages.” This article also seeks to highlight of the long history of Law of Torts, it is existing prior to 1066 in the society. Often, academicians and scholars of legal history contend that the law of torts long ago lost its mooring. Although legal scholars believes that the development of law of torts is often misunderstood. While other group of people believes that the law of torts developed from the brute recognition of strict liability for imposing more and more refined and moral and ethical standard of negligence, but many scholars consider it as partial true. Therefore, over the time, law of torts got a various theories and fundamental issues and challenges. And due to non-codification of law of torts, Court has very vast area for its interpretation and have to use high approach to decide the liability in tortious act.n

n

n

n

Full Text

n

n

[foreach 379]n

n[/foreach]

u276e u276f

n

References

n[if 1104 equals=””]

1. [2004] UKHL 41
2. [1951] 2 DLR 241
3. [1762] 3 Burr 1364
4. [1770] 4 Burr 2566
5. [1973] QB 27
6. M.C. Mehta v Union of India, A.I.R. 1987 S.C. 1086
7. [1895] AC 587 (HL)
8. [1897] 2 QB 57
9. [1377], Calendar of Plea and Memoranda Rolls 1364-81, 235.
10. [1401], Baker & Milsom, Sources of English Legal History, 557.
11. 1987 AIR 1086. 12. 1994 SCC (4) 1. 13. AIR 1997 9 SC552. 14. 1987 SCR (1) 819

n[/if 1104][if 1104 not_equal=””]n

[foreach 1102]n t
1. [if 1106 equals=””], [/if 1106][if 1106 not_equal=””],[/if 1106]

n[/foreach]

n[/if 1104]

n

n

n

Journal of Law of Torts and Consumer Protection Law

n

[if 344 not_equal=””]ISSN: 2583-3898[/if 344]

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

[if 1193 equals=””][else][/if] 

n [/foreach]n

[if 1181 equals=””][else][/if] 

n [/foreach]n