Tort Law Quiz: Test Your Legal Knowledge with Our Free Quiz

Overview:

Tort is a civil wrong that causes a claimant to suffer loss or harm, resulting in legal liability for the person who commits the tortious act.
Tort law aims to compensate individuals who suffer harm as a result of the actions of others.
Tort law can be contrasted with criminal law, which deals with criminal wrongs that are punishable by the state.
Obligations in both tort and criminal law are more fundamental and are imposed regardless of whether the parties have a contract.
Common law jurisdictions derive their tort law from customary English tort law.
In civil law jurisdictions based on civil codes, both contractual and tortious or delictual liability is typically outlined in a civil code based on Roman Law principles.
The main remedy available to plaintiffs under tort law is compensation in damages, or money.
Each legal system provides for a variety of defences for defendants in tort claims which, partially or fully, shield defendants from liability.
Legal injuries addressable under tort law in common law jurisdictions are not limited to physical injuries and may include emotional, economic, or reputational injuries as well as violations of privacy, property, or constitutional rights.
Torts may be categorised in several ways, with a particularly common division between negligent and intentional torts.
Negligence is a tort which arises from the breach of the duty of care owed by one person to another from the perspective of a reasonable person.
In order to win an action for negligence, a plaintiff must prove: duty, breach of duty, causation, scope of liability, and damages.

Liability:

Indirect liability for the tortious acts of others may arise due by operation of law, notably through joint and several liability doctrines as well as forms of secondary liability.
Liability may arise through enterprise liability or, in product liability cases in the United States, market share liability.
In certain cases, a person might hold vicarious liability for their employee or child under the law of agency through the doctrine of respondeat superior.
Absolute liability, in Indian tort law, is a unique outgrowth of the doctrine of strict liability for ultrahazardous activities.
In New Zealand, the tort system for the majority of personal injuries was scrapped with the establishment of the Accident Compensation Corporation, a universal system of no-fault insurance.
In the case of the United States, a survey of trial lawyers identified several modern innovations that developed after the divergence of English and American tort law, including strict liability for products based on Greenman v. Yuba Power Products, the limitation of various immunities, comparative negligence, broader rules for admitting evidence, increased damages for emotional distress, and toxic torts and class action lawsuits.

Categories of torts in common law jurisdictions:

Torts may be categorised in several ways, with a particularly common division between negligent and intentional torts.
Quasi-torts are unusual tort actions.
In some cases, the development of tort law has spurred lawmakers to create alternative solutions to disputes.
In other cases, legal commentary has led to the development of new causes of action outside the traditional common law torts.Overview of Tort Law in Common Law Jurisdictions
Tort law involves civil wrongs that cause harm or injury and result in legal liability.
There are three main categories of torts: intentional, negligent, and strict liability.
The existence of a duty of care is a key element in determining liability in tort law.
Remedies in tort law typically include compensation by way of damages, with injunctions and specific performance being relatively rare.
Legislative intervention has curtailed the ability of judges to award punitive or other non-economic damages in some common law jurisdictions.
Discovery is a pre-trial procedure unique to common law jurisdictions that enables plaintiffs to obtain evidence from defendants.
Common law countries have significant differences in tort law, with the United States being perceived as particularly prone to filing tort lawsuits.
Indian tort law includes remedies for constitutional torts and a system of absolute liability for hazardous activity.
There is no consistent approach to the tort of invasion of privacy among Canada's common law provinces, but there is a shift in jurisprudence toward recognizing breach of confidentiality as an actionable civil wrong.Overview of Delict Law in Different Legal Systems
Privacy is recognised as a constitutional right in India since 2017.
Scots and Roman-Dutch law are judge-made legal systems based on Roman law, with no exhaustive list of named delicts.
Delict operates on broad principles of liability for wrongdoing and includes harm, conduct, causation, wrongfulness, and fault.
The main remedies under Scots and Roman-Dutch law of delict are the Aquilian action and actio iniuriarum, which provide for economic and non-economic damages, respectively.
Liability under the actio iniuriarum in Scots and Roman-Dutch law has five essential elements: the act must be intentional, wrongful, affect a protected interest, cause harm, and be the cause of the harm.
Defences under delict law include grounds of justification, consent to injury, necessity, and private defence.
Chinese law in ancient times had concepts familiar to tort law, but modern Chinese law has four distinct legal systems.
In the Republic of China, tort law is based on the German pandectist approach to law, with tort liability for intentional or negligent damage to another's rights or interests.
Mainland China's Civil Code of the People's Republic of China codifies seven distinct categories of torts, with remedies for all categories of torts outlined in Book One of the CCPRC.
French tort law is based on the principle that all injuries give rise to a remedy, typically in the form of damages, with limits on the types of injuries and extent of damages claimed.Overview of Tort Law in Various Jurisdictions
French tort law is based on the principle of fault, but also recognizes vicarious and strict liability for product, machine, and agent/employee-caused damage.
German tort law recognizes three categories of liability: culpable injustice, injustice in rebuttable presumed liability, and strict liability arising from endangerment.
Israeli tort law is largely based on common law principles with influences from civil law jurisdictions, and provides for both compensation and injunctions as remedies for torts.
Japanese tort law requires negligence or intentionality, infringement of a legally recognized right, and a causal link for tort liability to exist, and provides for compensation for both economic and non-economic damages.
North Korea's legal system puts little emphasis on civil liability between private citizens, but its Law on the Compensation of Damages provides for tort liability and recognizes vicarious liability.
The Philippines' law of quasi-delict is largely a codification of common law principles and doctrines, and provides for compensation for damage caused by fault or negligence in the absence of a contractual or quasi-contractual relationship.
Damages under Philippine law are harmonized and established under the Philippine Civil Code.
The BGB, which governs German tort law, represents a school of legal jurisprudence that places great emphasis on minimizing impairment to individual freedom of action, in contrast to the Napoleonic Code, which places greater emphasis on the protection of individuals from the actions of others.
Japanese tort law developed based on case law and recognizes specific types of torts, such as the Law on the Compensation of Losses arising from Car Accidents, the Law on the Remedies of Harm Caused to Human Health by Pollution, and the Law on Product Liability.
German tort law does not recognize class action lawsuits or the notion of mass torts, and punitive damages are not permitted.
Japanese tort law does not allow for class actions and does not recognize mass tort liability, and punitive damages are forbidden on public policy grounds.
North Korean tort law recognizes capacity as an important factor in determining liability for one's own actions, and the state primarily corrects damages caused by tortious acts through economic intervention and criminal penalties.
The Philippine law of quasi-delict covers negligence and product liability, while intentional wrongs are covered separately under the chapter on "Human Relations" in the Philippine Civil Code.