Term
|
Definition
| The principle that a party can be legally liable in some circumstances for the actions of others. It most commonly arises in employment situations where the employer will be liable for torts and other wrongs committed by its workers if committed within the scope of their employment, or in partnerships and other agency situations where one partner can be liable for torts and other wrongs committed by other partners conducting partnership business.
Because of vicarious liability, Dominoes Pizza was held liable for injuries caused to the two pedestrians hit by its worker who was negligently driving a van while making a delivery. |
|
|
Term
| Unauthorized use of name or portrait |
|
Definition
| An intentional tort under the Privacy Act of B.C. whereby the defendant makes some commercial use of the plaintiff’s name or picture without authorization. There are a number of clearly stipulated defences to the tort; otherwise, it is actionable without proof of damage.
The plaintiff alleges that the defendant committed an unauthorized use of name or portrait when he used a photograph of her taken at the beach to advertise some beach equipment in his store without her consent. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| An intentional tort in which the defendant comes onto the property (i.e. land) of the plaintiff without the latter’s permission. It can also arise when, although originally on the plaintiff’s property with permission, the defendant no longer has permission to remain but refuses to leave.
The defendant committed trespass when he came onto the plaintiff’s premises after being told by the plaintiff several days earlier that he was not welcome. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| A civil harm or injury (not including breach of contract or trust) against a plaintiff’s person, property or reputation that entitles the plaintiff to pursue an action for damages and other remedies. Torts can be either intentional or unintentional.
The waitperson committed the tort of battery when he slugged the patron of the restaurant in the back of the head just moments after they had an argument over the poor tip the patron left. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| A defence to the tort of defamation in which the plaintiff can show that he made the injurious statements under the protection of parliamentary immunity or as result of legal proceedings, a coroner’s inquest, or a royal commission investigation.
The lawyer said his client the mayor was claiming absolute privilege because the statements she made about one of the council members occurred while council was in session. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| An intentional tort in which the defendant causes the plaintiff to fear or apprehend a battery would be committed against her, whether a battery occurs or not.
The defendant committed the tort of assault when he approached the plaintiff with his fist raised and said, “I’m going to knock your teeth out!” |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| An intentional tort in which the defendant, without the plaintiff’s consent, makes contact in some way with the bodily person of the plaintiff. The modern tort of battery can include everything from unwanted touching of a woman by a man to transmission of the AIDs virus by sexual intercourse.
The defendant committed battery when she angrily threw her pen at the plaintiff as he sat at his chair. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| An intentional tort in which the defendant interferes with the plaintiff’s personal property (i.e. not land) in some way. It can take a variety of forms, ranging from carriers or sellers wrongfully disposing of the plaintiff’s goods to the defendant’s returning the plaintiff’s goods in a damaged or spoiled state.
Helen sued her best friend for conversion after she lent her fur coat to the friend; the coat was returned in a soiled condition, and Helen no longer wants the coat but compensation for its replacement value. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| A sum of money awarded by a court to compensate a successful party in civil proceedings. Special damages pay the actual, out-of-pocket expenses that the plaintiff has incurred; general damages are a global amount for such things as pain, suffering, loss of future earnings, etc.; and punitive (exemplary) damages are an additional amount awarded when the defendant’s conduct has been particularly outrageous.
The court awarded damages of $40,558.63 to the plaintiff in her accident for injuries in a motor vehicle accident. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| An intentional tort, and that form of the tort of defamation in which the defendant makes an untrue verbal statement that is injurious to the plaintiff’s reputation. Generally, the plaintiff must prove that he suffered damages from the slander in order to recover the same from the defendant.
The plaintiff sued the defendant for slander after he learned the latter had falsely told some business associates he had AIDS. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| An intentional tort, also called “fraudulent misrepresentation,” in which the defendant knowingly makes a false statement, or makes it without believing it to be true, or who is recklessly careless whether it is true or false.
The travel agent was found liable in damages for deceit when she advised the plaintiff with the heart condition that there was a medical doctor on the island when in fact she knew there was not. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| A broadly defined term that has been interpreted to include sexually oriented conduct that in some way is tied to one’s terms or conditions of employment, and which interferes with work performance, or which creates a hostile, intimidating work environment. An aggrieved person can sue in tort or can file a complaint under s. 13 of the Human Rights Code.
The female employee filed a complaint with the Human Rights Tribunal that she had been the victim of sexual harassment after being repeatedly subjected to whistles and catcalls by her male co-workers whenever she walked through the warehouse area. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| An intentional tort in which the defendant makes some false statement about the plaintiff that is injurious to her reputation. It can be either “slander” or “libel,” depending upon whether the defamatory words were spoken or written.
The mining engineer successfully sued the small town newspaper editor for defamation in that the latter advised its readers that he had been convicted of criminal offences, when in fact he was only found guilty of violating some anti-pollution regulations. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| A defence to the tort of defamation by defendants who made the defamatory statement out of a legal, moral, or social duty. It can be invoked by employers providing confidential information about former workers, teachers advising about performance of former students, etc., and it will be sustained unless it can be shown the statements were made with malice.
Martin’s former employer had to advise Wal-Mart’s personnel officer that although Martin was an intelligent worker, he was somewhat lazy and careless; this statement would be covered by qualified privilege. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| A defence to the tort of defamation. It is usually relied upon by editors, columnists, and political analysts when making statements about public figures in the worlds of politics or entertainment; the defence is sustainable providing the statements were not made with malice.
Alan Fotheringham would want to rely upon the defence of fair comment after writing that a prominent federal Cabinet Minister lost his whole library of two books in a fire, one of which he had not finished colouring. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| An intentional tort in which the defendant makes a representation that confuses members of the general public into supposing that the plaintiff’s goods or services or trademark are in fact the defendant’s, thus causing the plaintiff financial loss.
The defendant was found liable in damages to Coca-Cola for passing off after marketing a product called “Cola-Coke” in a number of Latin American countries. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| An intentional tort in which the defendant, without legal justification for doing so, confines the plaintiff or prevents the plaintiff from leaving the premises in some way without justification. It is sometimes called unlawful confinement.
The shopkeeper was liable to being sued for false imprisonment when she detained the suspected shoplifter for fifteen minutes; unfortunately, it could not be proven that the plaintiff had in fact taken anything. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| An intentional tort in which the defendant does something that adversely affects the plaintiff’s use or enjoyment of her property. This is done continuously or over a fair amount of time. It can include a variety of things from making noise, emitting noxious fumes, placing of debris or refuse, etc. In the context of tort law, we are talking of private nuisance as opposed to public nuisance.
His conducting raucous, loud parties almost every night for several weeks resulted in the defendant being sued by his neighbours for the tort of nuisance. |
|
|
Term
| Inducing breach of contract |
|
Definition
| An intentional tort in which the defendant causes a third party to break his contract with the plaintiff.
The plaintiff sued its former worker’s new employer for inducing breach of contract; the defendant told the worker he would make more money if he quit working for the plaintiff. |
|
|
Term
Malicious prosecution
(also referred to as “abuse of process”) |
|
Definition
| An intentional tort in which the defendant pursues criminal proceedings against the plaintiff when there are no reasonable grounds to do so (and the plaintiff is acquitted), and which prosecution has an adverse impact upon the character, person, or financial interests of the plaintiff.
In 2003 a Saskatchewan court found a leading investigator, a police officer, and two Crown prosecutors liable in damages for $10 million for malicious prosecution where the plaintiff and his family were falsely charged with ritual and sexual abuse of children. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| The name of a court order that prohibits a party in a legal proceeding from doing something; often it is a remedy in tort actions or for breach of contract. Failure to comply with the injunction can result in a finding of contempt of court. An injunction obtained temporarily, before the final resolution of a matter at a hearing or trial, is called an interlocutory injunction.
In her suit for trespass against the defendant, the plaintiff asked the court for an injunction that prohibited the defendant from coming onto her property at any time in the future unless with her written permission. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| An intentional tort, and specifically that form of the tort of defamation in which the defendant makes an untrue statement about the plaintiff that is injurious to his reputation, and which appears in some written or otherwise permanent form. The plaintiff can sue for damages without proof of actual loss, and the burden of proof is upon the defendant to show the defamatory statement was true or he will be liable.
The defendant newspaper was sued for libel when it printed an account of the plaintiff’s having a history of molesting small children, which in fact was not true. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| An intentional tort in which the defendant makes a false statement about the plaintiff’s goods, services, or business that causes the plaintiff to suffer economic loss.
The defendants were found liable in damages for injurious falsehood after it was proven that they had spread unfounded rumours the plaintiff’s soft drink caused sterility in men. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| A form of defamation, either libel or slander, in which the words of the defendant themselves would not be defamatory, but they are defamatory in the context in which they are found.
The court found the defendant newspaper had made an innuendo against the plaintiff when the news story informed its readers that the rector had left town about the same time as the $3800 in the rectory was reported missing; in fact, the rector was on vacation, and he had nothing to do with the theft. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| An intentional tort in which the defendant engages in conduct that can include eavesdropping, surveillancing, or broadcasting personal information about the plaintiff to such degree as goes beyond what is considered reasonable.
The employer was sued for invasion of privacy after it was found to have installed video surveillance cameras in the toilet cubicles of the women employees’ restroom. |
|
|
