Tort of law Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1500 words

Tort of law - Essay Example Section 1 of Compensation Act reaffirms the present common law, and it should be noted that it was not meant to transform the law but to only to transform the perception among the public mind. (Lunney & Oliphant2008:178). Under English common law, an action for infringement of statutory duty can be initiated if an individual has suffered damage due to a breach of a statute and can initiate an action in tort as regards to such damages. In such cases, the claimant has to establish that the defendant had failed to carry out his legal duty in this regard. Thus, there is no necessity to prove whether such breach of duty was either negligent or intentional. It is to be noted that in Couch v Steel1, it was held that whenever there is an infringement of a law provision which resulted in damage to an individual interest, a right of action can be initiated under tort. However in Groves v Lord Winborne 2 and in Atkinson v New Castle and Gateshead Waterworks Co 3 which were the leading nineteent h century cases which strikingly barred the ambit of the tort, and demanded that any individual claim for infringement of statutory obligation must first prove that the legislature had an intent that an infringement of such individual’s interest or right should be tortuous. Lord Denning MR in Ex p Island Records Ltd held that if a private right is being hindered with by a criminal act, thereby resulting in a special damage over and above the generality of the public, then, under such scenarios, such individual can approach the court as a private individual and prey that his private rights should be safeguarded. (Murphy & Street 2007: 492). In establishing the standard of care, the courts will also look into any pertinent social utility linked with the defendant’s conduct. This includes fortitude of the general public interest so that issues other than just in dispute between the defendant and the claimant may be taken into account in evaluating the standard of care nee d of the defendant. (Murphy & Street 2007: 101). However, now, the English courts are giving due importance to the social utility of would be respondent activities, which have been now given statutory force. The section 1 of the Compensation Act 2006 now provides that where a court is judging a claim of negligence, it will, in establishing the needed standard care, â€Å"have a conscience to whether there is a need to take those actions which are required to meet that standard might be a) bar a proposed activity from being perused at all, to a specific magnitude or in a specific way, or b) dissuade such individuals from perusing such activities in relation to such desirable activity.† (Murphy & Street 2007: 102). In Anns v. Merton London Borough Council4, the plaintiffs were the lessees of a group of flats owned by the defendant. The lessees subsequently discovered that the flats were constructed with inadequate foundations. In this case , the House of Lords confirmed the fin dings of the Court of Appeals that plaintiffs could initiate an action against the defendants for the cost of repairing the foundations.( Christie 2000:123). In Stovin v Wise5 , it was held that even where the administrators have entered into some type of action to prevent the third party, and if they carelessly skip some probable â€Å"