Intentional Torts

Person

Trespass to Land, Goods or Person?

Goods

What type of trespass to person?

Land

What type of trespass to goods?

Battery

Assault

False Imprisonment

Trespass to Land

Trespass to Goods

Conversion

Detinue

Direct

Direct

Direct

Direct

Direct

&, only if touching:

Intentional

Intentional

Intentional

Intentional

Intentional

Contact w body

Act or threat

Total deprivation of liberty

sets foot up his neighbors close

Dispossesses OR moves OR destroys OR uses OR damages

Touches

which causes reasonable fear of imminent harm

Without reasonable means of escape

Without Permission

An item, which P has title to

Without lawful Justification

Without lawful Justification

Without lawful Justification

Without lawful Justification

Without lawful Justification

End.

Intentional Torts

=/ hostile = intention to do act which caused harm

Intentional

Sibley v Mulitinovic (1990)

McHale v Watson (1964)

Ruddock v Taylor [2005]

Intention to do harm

deliberate

McNamara v Duncan (1971)

Holmes v Mather (1875)

Doing something without considering consequenves Not taking enough care to prevent foreseeable harm occurring

reckless

Weaver v Ward (1616)

Morriss v Marsden [1952]

negligent

Williams v Milotin (1957)

Trespass requires directness and is not merely consequential

Direct

Hutchins v Moughan [1974]

Action has immediate consequence

Immediacy if action

Reynolds v Clarke (1725)

Trespass as a natural and probable consequence of the Ds act

Directness of act

Scott v Shepherd (1773)

Lack of an action severely altering the consequences

Lack of intervening act

Scott v Shepherd (1773)

Hutchins v Moughan [1974]

Gregory v Piper (1829)

Southport Corp. v Esso Petrol. Co. Ltd [1954]

Continue to specific torts

Battery

Intentional

Direct

Not necessary body to body, missiles and indirect contact are sufficient

Contact with the body

Rv Cotesworth (1704)

Pursell v Horn (1838)

Not every touch is a battery

A touch in anger

Cole v Turner (1704)

Different views on whether hostility is required

Hostility

Wilson v Pringle [1987]

Rixon v Star City Pty Ltd [2001]

End

Assault
Intention to create an apprehension of imminent harm =/ intent to follow through

Intentional

Rixon v Star City Pty Ltd [2001]

Brady v Schatzel; ex p Brady [1p11]

Direct

Threats can constitute words or acts or both

Act or threat

Is debated, no Australian authority, NSW has re: telephone

Can words be a threat?

Barton v Armstrong [1969]

In Ireland, there is a precedent for silence constituting an assault

R v Ireland [1998]

Focus is on the mind of P (assumed to be a reasonable person), not on the mind of D Imminence/ immediacy is important i.e. That the threat be unavoidable.

Apprehension

MacPherson v Beath (1975)

As exception, when D knows P to be timid and plays on this

NB: there must be an apparent (in the mind of P) ability of D to fulfil threat

Apprehension must be of imminent harmful contact

Zanker v Vartzokas (1988)

Barton v Armstrong [1060]

An altered test: is it reasonable for P to anticipate imminent force if he disobeys?

Limits of conditional threats

Rozsa v Samuels [1969]

Police v Greaves [1964]

Tuberville v Savage (1669)

End

False Imprisonment

Intentional

Direct

Threats can constitute words or acts or both

Act or threat

Is debated, no Australian authority, NSW has re: telephone

Can words be a threat?

Barton v Armstrong [1969]

In Ireland, there is a precedent for silence constituting an assault

R v Ireland [1998]

Focus is on the mind of P (assumed to be a reasonable person), not on the mind of D Imminence/ immediacy is important i.e. That the threat be unavoidable.

Apprehension

MacPherson v Beath (1975)

As exception, when D knows P to be timid and plays on this

NB: there must be an apparent (in the mind of P) ability of D to fulfil threat

Apprehension must be of imminent harmful contact

Zanker v Vartzokas (1988)

Barton v Armstrong [1060]

An altered test: is it reasonable for P to anticipate imminent force if he disobeys?

Limits of conditional threats

Rozsa v Samuels [1969]

Police v Greaves [1964]

Tuberville v Savage (1669)

End