There are two essentials of tort. These are:-
1. Wrongful act or omission
2. Legal damage – Infringement of legal damage
Wrongful act or omission
A person is liable for thought if he does some at which he was not supposed to do or omitted some at which he was supposed to do.
Example: trespassing, defaming, committing assault etc.
Carter Vs. Thomas
The defendant who entered the plaintiff land remarks is in good faith to extinguish the fire at which the fire extinguishing work man already working was held guilty of trespass.
Cope Vs. Sharpe
In this case the defendant enter into the plaintiff premises who stopped the spread of fire in the adjoining land where the defendants master had the shooting right. Since the defendant act was to prevent greater harm he was not held liable for the tress pass.
It has to be approved by the plaintiff that there has been a legal damage to him. There must be some legal damage caused to him that is infringement of legal right. If there is no infringement of legal right then no action can be brought under law of torts.
It is expressed by the maxim ‘injuria sine damno’ here injuria means causing infringement of legal right of the plaintiff. ‘Damno’ means substantial harm or loss. Damage can be in the form of money health reputation. If there is ‘injuria’ without ‘damnum’ then to the plaintiff can go to the court of law and can seek compensation because no infringement of legal right should go and underdressed
Since the important element is the infringement of legal right, which is actionable therefore if there is no infringement of legal right but there is some harm or loss then the plaintiff action will not lie in the court of law even if the loss was suffered by the plaintiff. This maxim is known as ‘damnum sine injuria’. It means damage without infringement of legal right is not actionable in a court of law.
There are two types of Torts:-
1. Actionable per se, it means no proof of damage is required like trespassing is actionable though no damage was caused.
2. Torts which requires proof of damage
‘Injuria sine damno’ means there is no need to prove damage only infringement of legal right is sufficient.
Collins Vs. Renisons
In this case the plaintiff went up the ladder for nailing a board on a wall in the defendant’s garden. The defendant feed him of the ladder and when sued he said that he just gently pushed him off the ladder and nothing else. It was held that the force used was not justifiable as the defence.
Ramesh Kumar Nayak Vs. Union of India
The post authorities failed to maintain a compound wall of the post office in good condition on the collapse of which the defendant sustained injuries. It was held that the postal authorities were liable since, that they had a duty to maintain the post office of the premises. Due to their breach of duty to do so the collapse occurred when they were held liable.
I have always been against Glorifying Over Work and therefore, in the year 2021, I have decided to launch this campaign “Balancing Life”and talk about this wrong practice, that we have been following since last few years. I will be talking to and interviewing around 1 lakh people in the coming 2021 and publish their interview regarding their opinion on glamourising Over Work.
If you are interested in participating in the same, do let me know.
The copyright of this Article belongs exclusively to Ms. Aishwarya Sandeep. Reproduction of the same, without permission will amount to Copyright Infringement. Appropriate Legal Action under the Indian Laws will be taken.
If you would also like to contribute to my website, then do share your articles or poems at email@example.com
We also have a Facebook Group Restarter Moms for Mothers or Women who would like to rejoin their careers post a career break or women who are enterpreneurs.
We are also running a series Inspirational Women from January 2021 to March 31,2021, featuring around 1000 stories about Indian Women, who changed the world. #choosetochallenge