Intentional Torts under Torts Law
Intentional Torts under Tort Law
Introduction
Intentional torts are wrongful acts done deliberately by a person to cause harm or offense to another. Unlike negligence (which involves carelessness), intentional torts require that the defendant intended the act that resulted in injury or offensive contact.
Key Elements of Intentional Torts
Intent: The defendant must intend the act that leads to harm or offensive contact. This can mean:
Desire to cause harm, or
Knowledge with substantial certainty that harm will result.
Voluntary Act: The act must be a conscious or voluntary action by the defendant.
Causation: The defendant’s act must be the actual and proximate cause of the injury.
Harm or Offense: The plaintiff must suffer harm or an offensive contact recognized by law.
Common Types of Intentional Torts
1. Battery
Definition: Intentional harmful or offensive physical contact with another person without consent.
Key Point: The contact need not cause physical injury; offensive contact suffices.
Case Example:
Vosburg v. Putney (1891)
Facts: A schoolboy lightly kicked another boy’s leg, causing injury.
Holding: The court held the defendant liable because the act was intentional and resulted in harm, regardless of intent to cause injury.
Significance: Introduced the “eggshell skull” rule — take the plaintiff as you find them.
2. Assault
Definition: An intentional act that creates a reasonable apprehension in the plaintiff of imminent harmful or offensive contact.
Key Point: No physical contact is necessary; the key is the reasonable fear or expectation of battery.
Case Example:
I de S et ux v. W de S (1348)
Facts: Defendant raised a sword threateningly in front of the plaintiff.
Holding: Recognized as assault because it created imminent apprehension of harm.
Significance: One of the earliest assault cases establishing apprehension as the key.
3. False Imprisonment
Definition: Intentional confinement or restraint of another person without lawful privilege and against their consent.
Key Point: The plaintiff must be aware of the confinement or harmed by it.
Case Example:
Whittaker v. Sandford (1911)
Facts: Plaintiff was confined on a ship and prevented from leaving.
Holding: Found false imprisonment because of unlawful restraint.
Significance: Established limits on lawful detention.
4. Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress (IIED)
Definition: Extreme and outrageous conduct intentionally or recklessly causing severe emotional distress.
Key Point: The conduct must be beyond the bounds of decency tolerated by society.
Case Example:
Wilkinson v. Downton (1897)
Facts: Defendant falsely told plaintiff her husband was seriously injured, causing shock.
Holding: The court allowed recovery for emotional distress caused intentionally.
Significance: Early recognition of IIED.
5. Trespass to Land
Definition: Intentional entry onto another’s land without permission.
Key Point: No harm to property is necessary; unauthorized entry suffices.
Case Example:
Entick v. Carrington (1765)
Facts: Officials broke into plaintiff’s home without a warrant.
Holding: Held trespass for unlawful entry.
Significance: Landmark case establishing protections against unlawful searches.
6. Trespass to Chattels and Conversion
Trespass to Chattels: Intentional interference with another’s personal property causing dispossession or damage.
Conversion: An intentional act depriving the owner of their property permanently or seriously interfering with it.
Case Example:
Pearson v. Dodd (1969)
Facts: Defendant took confidential documents without permission.
Holding: Found conversion due to unauthorized control over property.
Significance: Demonstrated conversion in the context of intangible property.
Intent and Transferred Intent Doctrine
If the defendant intends to commit a tort against one person but unintentionally harms another, transferred intent applies.
The intent transfers from the intended target to the actual victim.
Example Case:
Talmage v. Smith (1894)
Facts: Defendant threw a stick intending to hit one person but accidentally hit another.
Holding: Liability transferred to actual victim.
Significance: Established the transferred intent doctrine.
Defenses to Intentional Torts
Consent: Plaintiff consented to the act.
Self-defense: Protecting oneself from harm.
Defense of others: Protecting others from harm.
Defense of property: Reasonable force to protect property.
Necessity: Acts to prevent greater harm.
Summary Table
| Tort | Definition | Key Case | Important Notes |
|---|---|---|---|
| Battery | Intentional harmful/offensive contact | Vosburg v. Putney | Injury not required; offensive contact suffices |
| Assault | Reasonable apprehension of imminent harm | I de S et ux v. W de S | No contact needed |
| False Imprisonment | Intentional unlawful confinement | Whittaker v. Sandford | Plaintiff awareness or harm needed |
| Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress (IIED) | Extreme outrageous conduct causing distress | Wilkinson v. Downton | Severe emotional distress required |
| Trespass to Land | Unauthorized entry onto land | Entick v. Carrington | No damage needed |
| Trespass to Chattels/Conversion | Interference with personal property | Pearson v. Dodd | Conversion is serious interference |
Conclusion
Intentional torts protect individuals from deliberate invasions of personal safety, liberty, or property. Proof requires intentional conduct, causation, and harm or offense. The law balances protecting individuals’ rights with allowing freedom of movement and expression through various defenses.
RELATED Blog
0 comments