In many areas of tort law, the presence or absence of fraudulent intent is irrelevant, and if relevant, it can only serve to increase the recoverable amount of damages. However, in defamation actions, it may be particularly important to check whether the statement was published maliciously, not only to allow the plaintiff to receive higher damages, but also because it is a necessary part of the law itself. Malic, as used in defamation law, means that the publication was malicious or maliciously or recklessly as to whether it was true or false. The bad feeling must have led to the publication of the remarks and must have been addressed in particular to the applicant. Note that the presence of malice destroys the defence of justification, unintentional defamation, fair comment on the matter of public interest, and qualified privilege. On the other hand, a civil tort is a purely civil offence which gives rise to civil proceedings whose purpose is not to punish the perpetrators for the protection of the community, but to compensate the individual plaintiff for the damage he has suffered as a result of the defendant`s fault. The essential purpose of tort law is to compensate individuals who have been harmed by the misconduct of others. The substantive law of tort includes the rules and principles developed to determine when the law awards compensation for damages suffered and when it fails to do so. Such damage takes various forms, such as: bodily harm to persons; property damage; damage to reputation; and damage to economic interests. Tort law requires that any person not cause harm to others in certain situations, and if harm is caused, the victim has the right to sue the offender for damages as compensation. Another important difference between tort and crime is that, in order to succeed in criminal proceedings, the prosecution must prove its case beyond a doubt. The same is not true for civil actions, since in a tort action, the plaintiff only has to prove his case after weighing the probabilities.
However, if a tort is also a criminal offence, the criminal standard of proof under the Evidence Act is also required in civil proceedings. On the other hand, Kodilinye defined tort liability as; “a civil injustice involving a breach of an obligation under the law, which is generally owed to persons and their breach being remedied primarily by an action for damages.” The criminal acts of temptation and accommodation are old customary offences that protect the matrimonial rights of married persons; For example, the right of one spouse not to be denied the wife of the other spouse by a third party. Although temptation and refuge are valid offences in Nigeria, they have been abolished in England. (See section 2 (9) of the Administration of Justice Act, United Kingdom; and Best v. Samuel Fox & Co. (1952) 2 All ER 394.) The situation is similar with Professor Sir John. W. Salmond defined tort as; “a civil injustice for which the remedy is a common law action for non-lump sum damages and which is not exclusively a breach of contract or breach of trust or any other merely equitable obligation.” In the context of civil law, the purpose of tort law is to prohibit a person from harming another person and, if an injustice is committed, to give the injured party a civil right of action for damages or other remedy, such as an injunction directing the infringer, known as the aggrieved party, to to terminate the act specified in the court order, and so on. Damages are the financial compensation that a defendant pays to a plaintiff for the harm caused to him by the defendant. However, there is some overlap between contract and tort. For example, a victim of fraudulent misrepresentation in the contract may sue for the tort of deception, and a victim of negligent misrepresentation may sue for the tort of negligence.
In some cases, the consequences of the defendant`s unlawful conduct would be considered too minor if his fault imposed responsibility for those consequences. The court therefore sets the threshold above which the damage should be too low. Resident liability is the act or omission relating to the duty of care of a resident or manager of premises, fixed or movable structures to persons who visit or enter them and who are not criminals. It should be noted that there are three categories of people who can come to a resident`s premises. Conversely, certain obligations arising from tort may be modified by agreement, for example: the obligations of the occupier of the premises towards its visitors; and tort liability can be totally excluded by consent (the doctrine of volenti non fit injuria. It is tortious for a plaintiff to manufacture or market its products under a name very similar to the name of the plaintiff`s products, such that customers are confused and the defendant`s products are mislabeled as manufactured by the plaintiff and purchased as the plaintiff`s product.
Recent Comments