UPSC MainsLAW-PAPER-II202215 Marks
हिंदी में पढ़ें
Q14.

“Tortious liability arises from breach of duty primarily fixed by the law. This duty is towards persons generally and its breach is redressible by an action for unliquidated damages.” Comment.

How to Approach

This question requires a detailed understanding of the foundational principles of tort law. The answer should begin by defining tortious liability and its core elements – duty, breach, and remedy. It should then elaborate on the nature of the duty owed (general vs. specific), the concept of unliquidated damages, and the legal basis for establishing liability. Illustrative examples and relevant case laws will strengthen the response. A structured approach, covering the elements of a tort, types of duties, and the rationale behind unliquidated damages, is recommended.

Model Answer

0 min read

Introduction

Tortious liability, a cornerstone of civil law, arises when an individual’s conduct causes harm to another, giving rise to a legal claim for compensation. It differs from criminal law in its focus on private rights and remedies. The fundamental principle underpinning tort law is that individuals owe a duty of care to others, and a breach of that duty resulting in damage is actionable. As stated in the question, this duty is generally owed to persons at large, and the remedy for its breach is typically in the form of ‘unliquidated damages’ – compensation determined by the court based on the specific harm suffered. This commentary will explore the nuances of this statement, examining the nature of the duty, the concept of breach, and the rationale behind unliquidated damages within the framework of tort law.

Understanding Tortious Liability

Tortious liability is a civil wrong that causes someone else to suffer loss or harm resulting in legal liability for the person who commits the tortious act. Unlike contractual liability, which arises from a voluntary agreement, tortious liability arises from a duty imposed by law. This duty is not necessarily based on a prior relationship between the parties; it’s a general obligation to avoid acts that could foreseeably harm others.

The Duty Imposed by Law

The duty primarily fixed by law is a central tenet of tort law. This duty isn’t a contractual obligation but a legal obligation stemming from principles of reasonable care and conduct. The landmark case of Donoghue v Stevenson [1932] AC 562 established the ‘neighbour principle’, which defines the scope of this duty. According to this principle, one must take reasonable care to avoid acts or omissions which one reasonably foresees would be likely to injure one’s neighbour – those who are so closely and directly affected by one’s acts that one ought reasonably to have them in contemplation.

  • General Duty of Care: This is a broad duty owed to the public at large. Examples include the duty of drivers to operate vehicles safely, manufacturers to produce safe products, and landowners to maintain their property in a reasonably safe condition.
  • Specific Duties: These arise in particular relationships or situations, such as the duty of a doctor to a patient, a teacher to a student, or an employer to an employee. These duties are often more stringent than the general duty of care.

Breach of Duty

Breach of duty occurs when the defendant fails to meet the standard of care required by law. This is determined objectively – would a reasonable person in the defendant’s position have acted differently? Factors considered include the foreseeability of harm, the severity of the potential harm, the practicality of taking precautions, and the social utility of the defendant’s conduct. Negligence is the most common form of breach of duty.

Redressible by Unliquidated Damages

The final element is the redress for breach – unliquidated damages. Unlike liquidated damages, which are predetermined by contract, unliquidated damages are assessed by the court based on the actual harm suffered by the plaintiff. This harm can include:

  • Pecuniary Damages: These are quantifiable financial losses, such as medical expenses, lost wages, and property damage.
  • Non-Pecuniary Damages: These are more subjective and relate to pain, suffering, emotional distress, and loss of amenity. Determining the amount of non-pecuniary damages is often challenging and relies on judicial discretion.
  • Punitive Damages: Awarded in cases of egregious misconduct, these damages are intended to punish the defendant and deter others from similar behavior.

The principle of restitutio in integrum – restoring the plaintiff to the position they were in before the tort occurred – guides the assessment of damages. However, complete restoration is often impossible, particularly in cases involving personal injury.

Exceptions and Limitations

While the general principle holds true, there are exceptions and limitations to tortious liability. These include:

  • Volenti non fit injuria: ‘To a willing person, no injury is done.’ This defense applies when the plaintiff knowingly and voluntarily assumed the risk of harm.
  • Inevitable Accident: An accident that could not be prevented by the exercise of reasonable care.
  • Act of God: An event caused by natural forces that are unforeseeable and irresistible.
  • Statutory Authority: When an act is authorized by statute, it may not give rise to tortious liability.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the statement accurately reflects the core principles of tortious liability. The duty owed is indeed primarily fixed by law, extending generally to all persons who may be foreseeably harmed by one’s actions. A breach of this duty, established through negligence or other tortious conduct, is redressible through an action for unliquidated damages, allowing courts to tailor compensation to the specific harm suffered. While exceptions exist, the fundamental aim of tort law remains to provide a remedy for wrongful harm and promote responsible conduct within society. The evolving nature of tort law, particularly in areas like product liability and environmental damage, continues to refine these principles in response to changing societal needs.

Answer Length

This is a comprehensive model answer for learning purposes and may exceed the word limit. In the exam, always adhere to the prescribed word count.

Additional Resources

Key Definitions

Tort
A civil wrong, other than a breach of contract, for which a remedy may be obtained, usually in the form of damages.
Res Ipsa Loquitur
A doctrine meaning "the thing speaks for itself." It allows a court to infer negligence when an accident occurs that would not normally happen without negligence, and the defendant had exclusive control over the instrumentality that caused the harm.

Key Statistics

According to the National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB), India recorded 1.88 lakh cases of accidental deaths and suicides in 2022, many of which could potentially give rise to tort claims. (Data as of knowledge cutoff - 2024)

Source: NCRB Report, 2022

A 2021 study by the Indian Journal of Medical Ethics found that medical negligence cases account for approximately 5-10% of all civil litigation in India. (Data as of knowledge cutoff - 2024)

Source: Indian Journal of Medical Ethics, 2021

Examples

Medical Negligence

A surgeon accidentally leaves a surgical instrument inside a patient during an operation. This constitutes negligence, a breach of the duty of care owed to the patient, and the patient can sue for damages to cover medical expenses, pain and suffering, and potential long-term complications.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the difference between negligence and willful misconduct?

Negligence involves a failure to exercise reasonable care, while willful misconduct implies an intentional or reckless disregard for the safety of others. Willful misconduct often leads to higher damages, including punitive damages.

Topics Covered

LawTort LawNegligenceLegal Principles