Damnum sine injuria (Loss or damage for which there is no legal remedy)

• Meaning: This is a Latin term that means "damage without wrongful act." This maxim is based on a general principle that if the defendant exercises his lawful rights, without infringing the plaintiff’s legal rights, the defendant can’t be held liable under tort.
  • Not all harm or loss is considered wrongful and compensable by law.
  • It refers to a situation where someone suffers harm or loss, but there is no legal remedy because the harm was not caused by an unlawful act.
  • Example: Opening a fast-food outlet near another’s may cause loss of customers but does not give rise to legal action.
  • The rule of law is that the exercise of an ordinary right is no wrong even if it causes damage.
  • Case: Chief Vs Kanuji (2011) - Harmful acts that are not wrongful do not give rise to a cause of action.
• Legal Right: A legal right is an entitlement arising from law, conferring a lawful benefit upon a person.
  • A person suffering legal injury can challenge an act or omission.
  • The complainant must establish deprivation or denial of a legal right.
  • Case: Gloucester Grammar School Case - A defendant’s act causing financial loss without violating a legal right is not compensable.
• Case Law:
  • Acton v. Blundell (1843) - Landowners have limitless control over groundwater extraction, even if it harms neighbors.
  • Chasemore v. Richards (1859) - Landowners have a natural right to groundwater, regardless of motive.
  • Moghul Steamship Co. v. McGregor Gow & Co. (1892) - Lawful trade combinations for profit enhancement are not actionable.
• Injuria Sine Damno: This principle states that an injury to a legal right is actionable even without actual damage.
  • Cases of assault, battery, false imprisonment, libel, and trespass are actionable per se.
  • Case: Ashby v. White (1703) - The wrongful denial of voting rights entitled the plaintiff to damages despite no financial loss.
  • Case: Marzetti v. Williams (1830) - Preventing a customer from withdrawing money from their own account was a legal rights violation, warranting compensation.

Difference between Torts and Criminal Law

According to Blackstone, wrongs are divisible into two sorts or species: private wrongs (tort) and public wrongs (crime). The former is an infringement of the private or civil right belonging to individuals. The latter are breaches and violations of public rights and duties which affect the whole community; therefore, harsh action is provided against the wrongdoer.

• The state prosecutes violations of criminal law. A victim's consent is neither necessary nor sufficient for a prosecution. In tort law, the victim decides whether to bring a claim.
• Tort law requires harm as a prerequisite to a remedy. Criminal law punishes not only harmful acts but also those considered immoral or dangerous.
• Criminal law imposes more severe sanctions, such as loss of liberty or life, requiring higher procedural protections.
• Criminal law follows a proportionality principle in punishment, whereas tort law mainly focuses on compensation.
• Criminal law has a broader spectrum of culpability, including strict liability, negligence, recklessness, knowledge, and purpose, while tort law is mostly governed by negligence.
• Criminal law requires a higher level of fault for liability, whereas tort law often applies strict liability in cases such as employer liability.
• Victim's conduct matters more in tort law. Consent can serve as a full defense in torts but rarely in criminal law.
• Criminal law is statutory, while tort law remains largely judge-made with increasing statutory influence.
• Excuses to liability, such as insanity, are more readily accepted in criminal law than in tort law.

Torts and Contract Meaning

A contract means a promise or set of promises that the law enforces in case of a breach. A tort is a collection of legal remedies that allow an affected party to recover losses, injuries, or damages caused by another party’s wrongful act.

Distinction between Torts and Contracts

Torts and contracts are distinct areas of law dealing with different legal obligations and remedies.

Nature

• Tort: A tort is a civil wrong that causes harm to another person or their property, resulting in legal liability. Torts are based on principles of negligence, intentional wrongdoing, or strict liability.
• Contract: A contract is a legally binding agreement between two or more parties that creates rights and obligations enforceable by law. Contracts are based on mutual consent and are governed by the terms agreed upon by the parties.
• The key distinctions lie in the nature of the obligation, the basis of liability, and the remedies available.

Origin of Obligation

• Tort: The obligation in tort law arises from the duty of care that individuals owe to each other to avoid causing harm. This duty is generally imposed by law and exists independently of any agreement between the parties.
• Tort law imposes duties on the members of a community regarding socially acceptable and responsible behavior.
• Contract: The obligation in contract law arises from the agreement made between the parties. Contract law is designed to impose duties on the parties who enter into a contractual relationship.
• Each party is bound to perform their obligations as specified in the contract.

Basis of Liability

• Tort: Liability in tort law is based on fault. The person who commits the tort is liable for the harm caused, regardless of whether they intended to cause harm.
• Contract: Liability in contract law is based on the breach of contractual terms. If one party fails to perform their obligations under the contract, they may be liable for breach of contract.

Remedies

• Tort: Remedies in tort law include compensation in the form of unliquidated damages for the injury suffered, such as medical expenses, lost wages, and pain and suffering.
• In some cases, punitive damages may also be awarded to punish the wrongdoer.
• Contract: Remedies in contract law include damages for breach of contract, specific performance, and cancellation or rescission of the contract.

Third-party Rights

• Tort: Torts generally do not confer rights on third parties unless they are directly affected by the tortious act.
• Contract: Contracts can confer rights on third parties, known as third-party beneficiaries, if the contract expressly provides for it.

Case Laws

• Erlich v. Menezes, 981 P.2d 978 (Cal. 1999): The distinction between tort and contract is well grounded in common law. Contract actions enforce the intentions of the parties, while tort law primarily vindicates social policy.
• Applied Equipment Corp. v. Litton Saudi Arabia Ltd., 869 P.2d 454 (Cal. 1994): Contract and tort are different branches of law. Contract law enforces legally binding agreements, while tort law protects individuals from harm.

Similarities Between Contract and Tort

• Both are areas of civil law.
• The claimant must prove the case on the balance of probabilities.
• Remedies may be awarded provided that the claimant’s loss is not too remote a consequence of the defendant’s breach.
• Remedies are generally intended to compensate the claimant rather than to punish the defendant.
• Both laws deal with breaches of duties and seek justice for the victim.

• Rights
  • In contract law, obligations and rights arise from agreements between parties, whereas in tort law, courts create obligations and rights based on common law.
  • In torts, a person transgresses laws established by law, whereas in contract breaches, one party violates agreed terms.
  • In tort, the duty is imposed by law (right in rem). In contract, the duty is towards a specific party (right in personam).
• Duties
  • In contract law, parties determine duties, whereas in tort law, duties are imposed by law.
  • Parties can choose to enter a contract, but they cannot choose whether they will be bound by law in tort.
  • Duties in contract are towards specific persons, while duties in tort apply to the community at large.
• Minors
  • A minor can be held liable for torts but has limited liability in contracts.
  • Minors can be sued under tort law, and damages may be recovered from their property.
• Undue Influence
  • A contract is considered induced by undue influence when one party dominates the will of another to gain an unfair advantage.
• Privity
  • Privity is not required in tort law as harm is done against the injured party’s will.
  • In contract law, privity must exist, legally binding the parties to each other.
• Motive
  • Motive is generally irrelevant in tort law, which focuses on compensating victims rather than assessing intentions.
  • However, motive may be relevant in intentional torts like battery or defamation, especially when determining damages.
  • Punitive damages may consider motive in cases of egregious or malicious conduct.
• Damages
  • Tort law awards damages as real, contemptuous, or exemplary (unliquidated), whereas contract law awards liquidated damages.
  • Contract law rarely awards exemplary damages.
  • In contract law, damages are liquidated based on contractual terms, whereas tort law allows for non-economic damages like pain and suffering.
  • Punitive damages are rare in contract cases but common in tort cases, aiming to penalize wrongdoers.
  • In tort cases, plaintiffs can withdraw suits with or without claiming damages, unlike contract disputes.
• Limitation Period
  • In tort law, the limitation period starts when damage occurs.
  • In contract law, the limitation period begins from the date of breach.

Next Duty of care "donoghue v stevenson'"