The Law of Tort Case Study Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 5000 words

The Law of Tort - Case Study ExampleAncillary carrys are founded on accusations of intentional infliction of emotional distress.4 The discussion that follows examines the development of the Tort of nose and the available defences to such claims.Assault is any conduct which puts an individual in revere of immediate immoral harm or force upon his or her person.5 In other words, physical liaison is not a necessary element in the Tort of assault. Intention to cause harm is not a necessary element in the Tort of Trespass to the person founded on a claim of assault. cleric Denning stated early on in the character reference of Letang v Cooper 1965 QB 232 thatReasonable apprehension of injury or even mere contact is sufficient to substantiate a trespass to the person claim in assault. It matters not whether the intended victim is afraid or is capable of thwarting any assault. The test is an objective one and will depend on the reasonable apprehension of the reasonable man, rather tha n the particular and unique characteristics of the intended victim.In Stephens v Myers (1830) 4 C & P 349 the defendant was ordered to leave a parish meeting. In retaliation he launched for the chairman but the church warden quickly interceded and wherefore no contact was made. After finding the defendant liable for the Tort of assault, Lord Tindal, CJ said thatFor lawsuit in Thomas v Num 1986 Ch. ... However, if there is no reason to believe that the defendant stinker physically carry out his or her threat, the Tort of assault will not be substantiated. As Lord Tindal saidit is not every threat, when there is no actual physical violence, that discovers an assault, there must, in all cases, be the means of carrying the threat into effect.8For example in Thomas v Num 1986 Ch. 20 pickets making threats of violence accompanied by threatening gestures were held back by police and those to whom the threats were directed gained entry to the expound under protest via vehicles. There w as no assault since the defendants could not have carried out their threatened conduct. In the circumstances of the case the reasonable man, having regard to the simmpleness placed upon the defendants by police presence could not have reasonably apprehended harm.9 At one time words alone could not constitute an assault. The case relied upon was R v Meade and Belt (1823) 1 Lew CC 184 in which it was held thatno words or singing are equivalent to an assault.10However, in the case of R v Ireland 1998 AC 147 the House of Lords departed from this rule. Although the case itself was concerned with the criminal offence of assault it stands to reason that the same logic applies to the Tort of Trespass to the person with respect to assault. It was held thatthe means by which persons of evil disposition may intentionally or carelessly cause another to fear immediate and unlawful violence vary according to circumstances.11Lord went on to add thatThe proposition that a gesture may amount to an assault, but that words can never suffice, is unrealistic and indefensible. A thing said