3
OTHER CIVIL LAWS LAWS ON TORTS AND DAMAGES ATTY. CLEAVELAND BUELA 1. TORTS Definition of Torts Kinds of Tort Liabilities 1. Intentional Tort 2. Negligence 3. Strict Liability Persons Involved 1. Plaintiff 2. Defendant 2. NEGLIGENCE Definition of Negligence Sources of Negligence 1. Culpa contractual 2. Culpa aquiliana 3. Criminal Negligence *Reckless Imprudence and Simple Imprudence; Gross Negligence and Simple Negligence Distinctions between sources of negligence a. Culpa Aquiliana vs. Culpa Contractual b. Culpa Aquilana vs. Crimes Concurrence of Actions A single act or omission may give rise to two or more causes of action. a. One defendant, Two or more sources of obligation b. Two or more defendants Proscription on Double Recovery A party cannot recover twice for the same act or omission or under both causes of action. Test of Negligence 1. Did the defendant in doing the alleged negligent act use that reasonable care and caution which an ordinarily prudent person would have used in the same situation? If not, then he is guilty of negligence. 2. Could a prudent man in the case under consideration, foresee harm as a result of the course actually pursued? If so, it was the duty of the actor to take precautions to guard against harm. Foreseeability Undue Risk

TORTS Midterm Part 1

Embed Size (px)

DESCRIPTION

Torts

Citation preview

Page 1: TORTS Midterm Part 1

OTHER CIVIL LAWSLAWS ON TORTS AND DAMAGES

ATTY. CLEAVELAND BUELA

1. TORTSDefinition of Torts

Kinds of Tort Liabilities1. Intentional Tort2. Negligence3. Strict Liability

Persons Involved1. Plaintiff2. Defendant

2. NEGLIGENCEDefinition of Negligence

Sources of Negligence1. Culpa contractual2. Culpa aquiliana3. Criminal Negligence

*Reckless Imprudence and Simple Imprudence; Gross Negligence and Simple Negligence

Distinctions between sources of negligencea. Culpa Aquiliana vs. Culpa Contractualb. Culpa Aquilana vs. Crimes

Concurrence of Actions

A single act or omission may give rise to two or more causes of action.a. One defendant, Two or more sources of obligationb. Two or more defendants

Proscription on Double RecoveryA party cannot recover twice for the same act or omission or under both causes of action.

Test of Negligence1. Did the defendant in doing the alleged negligent act use that

reasonable care and caution which an ordinarily prudent person would have used in the same situation? If not, then he is guilty of negligence.

2. Could a prudent man in the case under consideration, foresee harm as a result of the course actually pursued? If so, it was the duty of the actor to take precautions to guard against harm.

Foreseeability

Undue Risk

Probability

Circumstances to Consider in Determining Negligence1. Time2. Place3. Emergency Rule; An individual who suddenly finds himself in a

situation of danger and is required to act without much time to consider the best means that may be adopted to avoid the

Page 2: TORTS Midterm Part 1

impending danger is not guilty of negligence if he fails to undertake what subsequently and upon reflection may appear to be a better solution.

Unless, the rule cannot be invoke of the person who is invoking it found himself in danger which he himself created through his own negligence.

4. Social Value of Utility of Activity5. Persons Exposed to the Risk

a. Childrenb. Other trespassers

Standard of Conduct: Good father of a family

Children; Liability

Physical Disability

Experts and Professionals

Intoxication

Insanity

WomenRes Ipsa Loquitor

a. The accident is of a kind which ordinarily does not occur in the absence of someone’s negligence;

b. It is caused by an instrumentality within the exclusive control of the defendant;

c. The possibility of contributing conduct which would make the plaintiff responsible is eliminated

3. MISFEASANCE AND NONFEASANCE

Duty to Rescue

Duty to the RescuerRequisites to make a tortfeasor liable to the rescuer:1. The defendant tortfeasor was negligent to the person

rescued and such negligence caused the peril or appearance of peril to the person rescued

2. The peril or appearance of peril to the person rescued3. A reasonably prudent person who would have

concluded such peril or appearance of peril existent4. The rescuer acted with reasonable care in effectuating

the rescue

Owners, Proprietors and Possessorsa. Trespassersb. Tolerated Possessorc. Visitors

Common Carriersd. Children

Attractive Nuisance Rulee. State of Necessityf. Liability to Neighbors and Third Personsg. Liability of Proprietors of Buildings

Employers

Employees