TORT

an instance of unlawful conduct that either is dangerous to life and limb, causes mental anguish, damages personal reputations, or violates certain rights, such as property rights or rights of privacy. The concept encompasses only those civil wrongs independent of contracts. The English word tort derives from the medieval Latin tortum (literally, something twisted, wrung, or crooked). In law, a tort is a civil wrongi.e., a wrong actionable in the courts independent of a breach of contractual obligation, a failure to observe a purely equitable duty, or a crime. Defamation (libel and slander), assault, trespass, nuisance, property damage, product defects, deceit, malicious prosecution, and negligence are all, apart from possible criminal and contractual aspects, torts. The law of torts attempts to provide a means of redress for damage or injury suffered. For instance, in the event a ferocious bull charges through a fence and wreaks havoc in a neighbouring farmyard, the owner of the bull, who has a strict statutory duty to ensure that such an escape does not occur, is liable by the law of torts to compensate the neighbouring farmer who has suffered damage. The form of compensation is usually monetary (damages), assessed according to the loss incurred as a result of the tortious act or failure to act. The purpose of the law of torts is to delimit, in the event of damage or injury resulting from an act or omission, a right to compensation and the extent of the compensation that may be claimed. That an act or omission may be deemed not to be tortious does not necessarily mean that a wronged party cannot seek redress in the form of compensation. A breach of contract, for example, will entitle the wronged party to damages, but the form of action in such a case is in the law of contract, not tort. It is possible, of course, for an act or omission to be both a tort and a breach of contract. Because of the overlap in such areas, the strict definition of tort has traditionally been a subject of keen academic debate. The concept of negligence is of great importance in the law of torts. The main method of assessing whether or not a particular act or omission is negligent is through the concept of a duty of care. The extent of such a duty depends on a concept of reasonable foreseeability (the fictitious standards of the proverbial man on the street). For instance, is it reasonably foreseeable that the presence of a decomposed snail in a bottle of ginger beer will cause injury to the consumer (the celebrated British case of Donoghue v. Stevenson)? A prerequisite for the success of an action in the law of torts is that a duty should be present, that the duty should be owed to the particular person who has suffered injury or damage, and that actual injury or damage has been suffered. Modern developments in the law of torts are much concerned with ideas of insurance (a system of loss-spreading through society generally) and social security provisions (state compensation for accidents and injuries at work). As these ideas take hold, the concept of no-fault liability is gradually becoming more widespread in the area of tort law. in common law, any instance of harmful behaviour, from physical attack on one's person to interference with one's goods or use and enjoyment of one's land, economic interests, and honour, reputation, and privacy. The concept encompasses only those civil wrongs independent of contracts. Other legal systems use different terms for this wide and amorphous area of the law. Germans, for example, talk of unlawful acts; French-inspired systems use interchangeably the terms dlits (and quasi-dlits) and civil responsibility. Despite differences of terminology, however, this area of the law is primarily concerned with liability for behaviour that the legal order regards as socially unacceptable, typically warranting the award of damages to the injured party. It is broadly true to say that most western European and common-law systems tend to regard as actionable the same factual situations. But although the results are often quite similar, the arrangement of the law and the methodology often differ significantly. The German Civil Code has a strong tendency to abstraction and systematization, displaying its university origins and contrasting sharply with the more casuistic (here, law deriving from authority based on cases considered one-by-one as opposed to law deriving from a general principle) and judge-made law of the common-law systems. In between there are the 19th-century codifications, which are the products of the natural school of law and which have adopted manifesto-like provisions in their codes. Typical of this approach is the French Civil Code of 1804; much contemporary French law results from interplay between judicial activity and doctrinal writing. Tort law, until recently the junior partner to contract law in the law of civil obligations, has since World War II expanded everywhere, though especially in continental Europe. At the same time, criticism of it has led to its replacement either partially by specialized schemes or, in rare cases, by complete systems of accident compensation. Criticism has also provoked serious discussion about the impact of the welfare state, modern insurance practices, and the importance of economic analysis in the proper development of the law. Additional reading American law The best treatise on American law is Prosser and Keeton on the Law of Torts, edited by W. Page Keeton, 5th ed. (1984). Mark A. Franklin and Robert L. Rabin, Cases and Materials on Tort Law and Alternatives, 3rd ed. (1983), is one of the most stimulating casebooks. English law The standard authority for English law is Clerk & Lindsell on Torts, 15th ed., edited by R.W.M. Dias (1982). John G. Fleming, The Law of Torts, 6th ed. (1983), offers the most modern treatment. R.W.M. Dias and B.S. Markesinis, Tort Law (1984), adopts a policy-oriented presentation of the law. P.S. Atiyah, Accidents, Compensation, and the Law, 3rd ed. (1980), provides a thought-provoking account of the workings of various systems of compensation. French law Henry Mazeaud et al., Trait thorique et pratique de la responsabilit civile dlictuelle et contractuelle, 6th ed., 3 vol. in 4 (196583), is the classic exposition of French law. An excellent modern presentation is Genevive Viney, Les Obligations; la responsabilit: conditions, vol. 4 in Trait de droit civil, edited by Jacques Ghestin, 4 vol. (197782). German law Karl Larenz, Lehrbuch des Schuldrechts, vol. 1, 13th ed. (1982), and vol. 2, 12th ed. (1981); and Hein Ktz, Deliktsrecht, 3rd ed. (1983), are both highly respected treatises on German law. Comparative law H.L.A. Hart and Tony Honor, Causation in the Law, 2nd ed. (1985), is the classic monograph on causation. Other comparative discussions include Andr Tunc, La Responsabilit civile (1981); Konrad Zweigert and Hein Ktz, Einfrung in die Rechtsvergleichung auf dem Gebiete des Privatrechts, 2nd rev. ed., 2 vol. (1984), the first edition of which is also available in English as An Introduction to Comparative Law (1977); and F.H. Lawson and B.S. Markesinis, Tortious Liability for Unintentional Harm in the Common Law and the Civil Law, 2 vol. (1982). Basil S. Markesinis