17. Death and Damages

This chapter first considers the effect of the death of one of the parties on an existing cause of action in tort. It then considers the circumstances in which the wrongful death of another person gives rise to a new cause of action in those who have suffered loss as a result of the death, and the way in which damages are assessed in such cases.

15. Vicarious Liability

The law of vicarious liability traditionally operates so as to impose liability on an employer for the tort of an employee, but several conditions must be satisfied. This chapter discusses the development of and justification for vicarious liability; the employment relationship and relationships ‘akin to employment’; and the requirement that the tort be committed in the course of employment for vicarious liability to arise. The chapter also considers primary liability of an employer for the conduct of an employee or independent contractor, arising out of breach of a non-delegable duty of care.

14. Privacy

The right of privacy under Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights was incorporated into English law by the Human Rights Act 1998, but English law as yet recognises no tort of invasion of privacy as such. Admittedly, a number of specific torts protect particular aspects of privacy, but this protection may be regarded as haphazard, incidental, and incomplete. Recent decisions, however, have seen substantial developments in the protection given to particular privacy interests, above all by adapting the law of breach of confidence to provide a remedy against the unauthorised disclosure of personal information. These issues are discussed in this chapter.

1. General Introduction

This chapter first discusses the historical development of tort law, covering the origins of tort law; the forms of action; the development of fault-based liability; eighteenth-century developments; the classification of obligations; and the modern pre-eminence of negligence. It then turns to theories of tort, covering the aims of the law of tort and doctrinal classifications. Finally, the chapter considers modern influences on tort law, covering the influence of insurance; the influence of human rights; and concerns about ‘compensation culture’.

13. Defamation

This chapter examines the law of defamation, which protects a claimant’s reputation. It explains the distinction between libel and slander, and outlines the elements of the cause of action for defamation: that the statement must be defamatory; must refer to the claimant; and must be published. The chapter then considers the general defences to liability for defamation: (1) truth, (2) honest opinion, (3) privilege (both absolute and qualified), (4) responsible publication on matter of public interest, (5) offer of amends and (6) innocent dissemination. The chapter concludes with a discussion of remedies for defamation.

11. Special Liability Regimes

Although much of the law of tort is based upon general common law principles, there are a number of situations where special liability regimes have been created. This chapter focuses on four of these special liability regimes. The first regime to be considered is employers’ liability, whose origins lie in nineteenth-century common law. Two other special regimes are then considered: the liability of occupiers to those coming onto their land (governed by the Occupiers’ Liability Acts of 1957 and 1984) and liability in respect of defective products (governed by the Consumer Protection Act 1987). In both these areas Parliament has intervened to remedy perceived failings in the common law. The final part of this chapter considers the common law action for breach of statutory duty. This differs from the action for negligence in that the source of the defendant’s duty is not the common law; rather, the claimant’s case is founded on a breach of a duty imposed on the defendant by Parliament.

9. Negligence: Duty of Care—Omissions and Acts of Third Parties

This chapter examines liability for omissions and for the acts of a third party in negligence. Despite the general principle excluding liability for omissions, liability may arise in certain exceptional circumstances, but no precise categorisation is possible of the various situations in which a duty of affirmative action is recognised. The question of liability for the acts of a third party often overlaps with the question of liability for omissions because in a third party case the complaint is often of an omission, for example a failure to control a third party, or to prevent a dangerous situation from being sparked off by a third party. But not all third-party cases involve omissions. Sometimes the complaint is simply that the defendant provided the third party with the opportunity or the means to injure the claimant, and it is that conduct which is alleged to be negligent, regardless of whether the defendant unreasonably failed at some subsequent point of time to intervene to prevent the injury.

8. Negligence: Duty of Care—Economic Loss

This chapter examines liability for economic loss in negligence. It discusses the basic exclusionary rule in respect of pure economic loss; defective product economic loss; the Hedley Byrne exception; the development of Hedley Byrne liability; Hedley Byrne and the three-stage Caparo test; and White v Jones. The final section of the chapter first considers an economic analysis of the liability rules in this area, and then introduces the debate between rights-based and policy-based critiques of the current law.

6. Defences to Negligence

This chapter examines the following defences to a claim in negligence: volenti non fit injuria; contributory negligence; exclusion of liability; and illegality. The defence of volenti non fit injuria reflects the common sense notion that ‘[o]ne who has invited or assented to an act being done towards him cannot, when he suffers from it, complain of it as a wrong’. Contributory negligence is a partial defence that operates not to defeat the claimant's claim entirely but rather to reduce the amount of damages the defendant must pay. A defendant may seek to exclude all potential liability to another person in advance of exposing himself to the risk of a possible claim. The defence of illegality denies recovery to certain claimants on the grounds that their claim is tainted by their own illegal conduct.

5. Causation and Scope of Liability

Before liability can arise in negligence a causal link must be established between the negligence of the defendant and the injury for which the claimant claims compensation. The first hurdle that must be overcome is to show an historical connection between the defendant’s negligence and the injury (factual causation). This is normally decided by the application of the but-for test: but for the defendant’s negligence, would the claimant have suffered the injury that he or she did? If factual causation is satisfied, the claimant must then show that the defendant should be legally responsible for the damage the claimant has suffered. This second strand of the causation enquiry may involve issues of ‘legal causation’, which is to say consideration of the effect of intervening acts, whether of the claimant or of a third party, occurring between the defendant’s negligence and the claimant’s injury. It may also involve consideration of whether the defendant should not have to pay for the full extent of the damage because it is considered too remote. These issues are considered in this chapter.