textbook notes

5 Pages
Unlock Document

University of Toronto St. George
Robert Barber

Chapter 8: An economic theory of tort law What is tort law? Tort law occurs when there is a breach of a duty owed to society. It occurs when the victim cannot sue under property law because it does not involve property, nor contract law, because the parties did not enter into any contract. The most common examples of tort law cases involve auto accidents, slanderlibel, product liability, environmental pollution, etc. Tort law is usually unintentional harm; intentional torts are usually crimes. Tort law exists because the costs of bargaining for some kinds of harm are so high that parties cannot cooperate together. Example: every drive cannot negotiate with every other driver to allocate the costs of future accidents. Nor can every driver enter into a contract with every other person that might be injured. Another reason is when absolute costs are low, but relative costs are high. Example: Three hunters go hunting. Before hunting, they could negotiate an agreement to allocate cost of an accident; however the probability of an accident is low, so cost of negotiating is high. Economic purpose of tort liability is to induce injurers and victims to internalize the costs of harm that can occur. The economic essence of tort law is its use of liability to internalize externalities created by high transaction costs. Traditional theory of torts: Three elements must be present for plaintiffs recovery: 1. The plaintiff must have suffered harm. For example, the owner of a car with a conventional carburetor cannot be compensated if the manufacturer sells carburetors, but only the turbocharged ones are defective. Courts trying to internalize costs often use perfect compensation, but it is hard to implement because the value of intangible harm (such as death) is hard to estimate. 2. The defendant must have caused the harm. For example, if the two hunters both shoot the third hunter accidentally, only the one who actually did damage is liable. The but-for rule decides whether event A caused event B: But for A, would B have occurred? In a series of multiple events, the approximate cause is the most proximate event (the event that is closest to the one causing the harm). 3. The defendant must have breached his duty. In short, the defendant must have been at fault, or negligent. Some fault is binary (yes or no), but some is continuous (a car can change speed continuously). The legal standard of care is the minimum acceptable standard of precaution. This is the standard of precaution a reasonable person would take (ie. Driving at or less than the speed limit). www.notesolution.com
More Less

Related notes for ECO320H1

Log In


Don't have an account?

Join OneClass

Access over 10 million pages of study
documents for 1.3 million courses.

Sign up

Join to view


By registering, I agree to the Terms and Privacy Policies
Already have an account?
Just a few more details

So we can recommend you notes for your school.

Reset Password

Please enter below the email address you registered with and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Add your courses

Get notes from the top students in your class.