17. Remedies and limitation

Without assuming prior legal knowledge, books in the Directions series introduce and guide readers through key points of law and legal debate. Questions, diagrams, and exercises help readers to engage fully with each subject and check their understanding as they progress. The Calcutt Committee Report on Privacy and Related Matters (1990) defines privacy as ‘the right of the individual to be protected against intrusion into his personal life or affairs, or those of his family, by direct physical means or by publication of information’. While a number of different torts indirectly address wrongful intrusion into another’s privacy, English law has not directly protected privacy in its own right. It was the Human Rights Act 1998 that has made it possible to use breach of confidence in regulating the publication of private information. This chapter looks at the history of the protection of privacy in English law, discusses the current legal approaches to privacy, examines the impact of the Human Rights Act 1998 on this developing area of law, and evaluates English law on privacy in an international context.

13. Rylands v Fletcher

Without assuming prior legal knowledge, books in the Directions series introduce and guide readers through key points of law and legal debate. Questions, diagrams, and exercises help readers to engage fully with each subject and check their understanding as they progress. Nuisance protects against ‘indirect’ interference with the claimant’s use and enjoyment of land. There are two categories of nuisance: public nuisance and private nuisance. Private nuisance refers to an unreasonable interference with the use or enjoyment of land. In order to sue in private nuisance, the claimant must have an interest in the land affected. This chapter examines the elements of liability in private and public nuisance and discusses the differences between them.. It also looks at the relationship between nuisance and fault-based liability and evaluates the human rights dimension to the law of nuisance.

12. Nuisance

Without assuming prior legal knowledge, books in the Directions series introduce and guide readers through key points of law and legal debate. Questions, diagrams, and exercises help readers to engage fully with each subject and check their understanding as they progress. Manufacturers and producers are liable for personal injury or damage to property caused by a defective product. The claimant will not only recover in contract for personal injury and property damage caused by the defective product, but he will also be compensated for the cost of replacing the product itself. The Consumer Protection Act 1987 of the UK involves a strict liability regime for defective products on a variety of potential defendants. This discusses the limitations of the tort system in providing compensation to a victim of harm caused by a defective product, and analyses the scope and limitations of the Consumer Protection Act 1987.

9. Employers’ liability and non-delegable duties

Without assuming prior legal knowledge, books in the Directions series introduce and guide readers through key points of law and legal debate. Questions, diagrams, and exercises help readers to engage fully with each subject and check their understanding as they progress. While tort law is largely based on case law developed by judges through the common law, the liability of occupiers for the injuries suffered by those on their premises is governed by two statutes: the Occupiers’ Liability Act 1957 and the Occupiers’ Liability Act 1984. The chapter explains the scope of an occupier’s liability and how it relates to other aspects of negligence, considers the duty of care owed by occupiers to lawful visitors under the Occupiers’ Liability Act 1957, discusses the duty of care owed by occupiers to trespassers under the Occupiers’ Liability Act 1984 and how it relates to the previous common law duty of care.

15. Defences to defamation

Without assuming prior legal knowledge, books in the Directions series introduce and guide readers through key points of law and legal debate. Questions, diagrams, and exercises help readers to engage fully with each subject and check their understanding as they progress. Defamation differs from other aspects of tort law because it is concerned with protecting against harm caused by words. The law of defamation is intended to provide compensation for people whose reputations have been damaged by untrue statements and it also allows one to obtain an interim injunction to stop a potentially defamatory statement from being published. This chapter discusses the human rights dimension in defamation and the procedural and substantive changes to defamation law introduced by the Defamation Act 2013. It also explores how to strike a balance between the competing rights of freedom of expression and protection of reputation.

14. Elements of defamation

Without assuming prior legal knowledge, books in the Directions series introduce and guide readers through key points of law and legal debate. Questions, diagrams, and exercises help readers to engage fully with each subject and check their understanding as they progress. Rylands v Fletcher was an 1868 case that gave birth to a rule imposing strict liability for damage caused by the escape of dangerous things from land. The tort in Rylands v Fletcher differs from nuisance because it does not consider the involvement of the defendant in a continuous activity or an ongoing state of affairs. What distinguishes Rylands v Fletcher from actions in negligence is that there is no need for the existence of a duty of care and its breach, along with the questionable place of personal injury as an actionable type of damage. This chapter examines the tort in Rylands v Fletcher and the nature of the rule that arose from it. It also considers recent case law developments concerning Rylands v Fletcher and their impact on the current state of the law. Finally, the chapter evaluates the defences pertaining to Rylands v Fletcher.

8. Negligence: occupiers’ liability

Without assuming prior legal knowledge, books in the Directions series introduce and guide readers through key points of law and legal debate. Questions, diagrams, and exercises help readers to engage fully with each subject and check their understanding as they progress. The claimant has the burden of establishing liability for the tort while the defendant has the burden of establishing the defence. If the claimant establishes a successful cause of action in tort, the defendant must plead one (or more) of the defences available to him. If the defendant establishes a successful defence, either his liability for the damage may be reduced or he may be totally absolved from liability. This chapter examines general defences applicable to all torts but which have particular relevance to claims in negligence, focusing on contributory negligence, volenti non fit injuria, and ex turpi causa non oritur actio.

7. General defences

Without assuming prior legal knowledge, books in the Directions series introduce and guide readers through key points of law and legal debate. Questions, diagrams, and exercises help readers to engage fully with each subject and check their understanding as they progress. The tort of negligence originated as a remedy for property damage and physical injury. However, recovery of compensation for psychiatric injury and pure economic loss, in cases where they were not caused by physical injury or property damage, has proved difficult. Duty of care for psychiatric injury is contingent upon whether the claimant is a primary or secondary victim. This chapter discusses the policy reasons for limiting duty of care for psychiatric injury, the mechanisms by which the law limits duty of care for psychiatric injury, the meaning of ‘pure economic loss’, and the development of the Hedley Byrne & Co Ltd v Heller & Partners Ltd (1964) principle of liability for negligent statements. The chapter also examines the ‘thin skull’ rule, which applies to psychiatric injury in the same way as to physical injury.

6. Negligence: duty of care problem areas

Without assuming prior legal knowledge, books in the Directions series introduce and guide readers through key points of law and legal debate. Questions, diagrams, and exercises help readers to engage fully with each subject and check their understanding as they progress. In addition to duty of care and breach of that duty, the third essential element to bring a successful action in negligence is causation of damage. In other words, the claimant must prove on the balance of probabilities that the breach caused his damage. The defendant cannot be made liable for the harm suffered by the claimant if he is not responsible, or partly responsible, for such harm — even if he has been negligent. The question of causation can be divided into two issues: causation in fact and causation in law (also known as remoteness). The primary means of establishing factual causation is the ‘but for’ test. Reasonable foreseeability of damage of the relevant type (Wagon Mound) is required to establish that the claimant’s injury is not too remote. The chain of causation may be broken by unreasonable or unforeseeable acts or events (novus actus interveniens).

4. Breach of duty

Without assuming prior legal knowledge, books in the Directions series introduce and guide readers through key points of law and legal debate. Questions, diagrams, and exercises help readers to engage fully with each subject and check their understanding as they progress. Negligence is a tort in its own right and involves an unintentional wrong as opposed to trespass which involves an intentional wrong. It has three main elements: duty of care (whether the defendant owes the claimant a duty of care), breach (whether the defendant has broken that duty), and damage (whether that breach has caused damage of a legally recognized kind to the claimant). Duty of care is determined by proximity, foreseeability, and policy and is most likely to be established in cases of positive acts which cause physical injury or property damage. This chapter provides an overview of the history of negligence and discusses the function of duty of care in negligence. It also considers the way duty of care has been defined and developed and applies the principles of duty of care in the areas of omissions and liability of public bodies.