Torts Course Plan
-
Upload
abhinavparashar -
Category
Documents
-
view
50 -
download
0
description
Transcript of Torts Course Plan
Format No. QSP/7.1/01.F01 (C)IssueNo.04 Rev. No 4 Dated: June 7, 2014
UNIVERSITY OF PETROLEUM & ENERGY STUDIESCollege of Legal Studies
Dehradun
COURSE PLAN
Programme : BA., LL.B. (Hons) Energy LawsCourse : Law of Torts Semester : III rd Session : July to Dec. 2014Batch : 2013 -18Subject Code : LLBL241No. of credits : 4Prepared by : Pooja GautamEmail : [email protected]
Approved By
_______________________ _______________________HOD Dean
UPES Campus Tel : +91-135-2770137“Energy Acres” Fax : +91 135- 27760904P.O. Bidholi, Via Prem Nagar Website : www.upes.ac.inDehradun -248 007 (U K)
COURSE PLAN
Subject: Law of Torts Course: BALLB
Duration: July 2014– December-2014 Subject code: LLBL241
A. OBJECTIVES:
1. to familiarize the students with the nature and extent of liability of the private enterprises, multinationals and the government authorities for the wrongs committed against the individual and their property,
2. to develop sound knowledge, skills and disposition on some of the contemporary issues of Specific Torts, Cyber Tort, Family Tort, and Economic Tort, Product Liability etc.
B. COURSE OUTLINE
It has 11 modules which are as follows:
Module 1:- Definition and Nature of the Law of Tort Definition, nature and evolution of the law of torts. Difference- “Law of Tort” or “Law of Torts.” Tort & Crime, Tort & Contract. Basis of the tortuous liability; Basic legal maxims for Determination of liability; viz
Ubi jus Ibi remedium, Injuria Sine Damnum and Damnum Sine Injuria.
Module 2:- Liability for the Wrong Committed by Other Person Principle of Vicarious Liability and its basis- Master and Servants, Principle and
Agent, Partners of a firm, State’s Liability: Doctrine of Sovereign Immunity in reference to the Crown Proceedings Act 1947, Federal Torts Claims Act 1946 and Article 300 of the Indian Constitution.
Joint Tort Feasors, joint and several liabilities in payment of damages.
Module 3:- Negligence, Contributory Negligence and Nuisance Negligence as a tort and its various dimensions in the present world viz. Professional
Negligence, psychiatric damage; economic loss; Foresight of harm as test of the existence of negligence, Proximate Cause and Intervening cause, concurring negligence of the third person
Contributory Negligence, Last Opportunity Rule, Res Ipsa Loquitur Injury Caused by Plaintiff’s negligence, Injury Caused by Defendant’s negligence, Concurring Contributory negligence, Representation in Contributory Negligence and Imputed Negligence.
History of Nuisance, Nuisance and interference with real rights, Remedy for Nuisance, Nuisance in conduct of Business, Public Nuisance.
Module 4: - General Defenses for the Tortuous Liability
College of Legal Studies July.-December. 2014
Volenti non fit injuria, Vis Major (Act of God), Inevitable Accident, Necessity Statutory Authority, Judicial and Quasi Judicial, Parental and Quasi- Parental Authorities. Act of Third Parties, Plaintiff’s Default, Mistake
Module 5:- Torts Against Human Being and Property Assault, Battery, Emotional Distress, Malicious Prosecution and abuse of legal
proceedings, Conspiracy, False Imprisonment Defamation: Freedom of Speech and Expression and liability for Defamation in the
civil and criminal law, different branches of Defamation: Libel, Slander and hybrid types of the Defamation; Defamation in Blogs & Cyberage; Privilege, fair Comment and Criticism, malice and right of privacy.
Trespass to land, trespass to goods, conversion, Passing off, Injury to trademark, patent & copyrights.
Module 6: - Liabilities based on fault Principle of Strict Liability and applicability of it in India, Exceptions of strict liability, The Principle of Absolute Liability
Module 7: - Remedies Remedies – extra judicial remedies, judicial remedies- damages, injunction ,
restitution, writs Remoteness of Damage- Various principles for fixing the liability and to ascertain the
damages for the wrong committed viz “But for Test”, “Directness Test” and the “Doctrine of Reasonable foresight”.
Module 8: Emerging areas of Tort: Cyber Tort Emerging Trends in the law of tort for example, wrongs relating to Domestic Rights,
viz marital rights, parental rights, domestic violence, seduction of female child etc Rights in Cyberspace, Cybertrespass, Cyberstalking, pamming, Invasion of Privacy in
Cyberspace, Cyberlibel, Cybersquating, .Product liability in a hi-tech environment Jurisdiction in Cybertort
Module 9: Statutory Tort1. Motor Vehicles Act,1988
a. Chapter-X Liability without Fault (Ss.140-144)b. Chapter-XI Insurance of Motor Vehicles (Ss.145-164)c. Chapter- XII Claims Tribunal (Ss. 165-173)
Module 10: Product Liability and Protection of Consumers’ Interest: Product Liability – theories of causation, defectiveness and proximate reason, tortuous
misrepresentation and negligence, The Consumers’ Protection Act and its applications.
C. PEDAGOGY
College of Legal Studies July.-December. 2014
Interactive approach during the study. (Students are supposed to come prepared for the topics for discussion in the class/ case studies/ Presentations/ Viva-voce), randomly any student can be called on the board to solve the problems.
Work in small groups for Group Projects and personalized teaching. (Student counseling, mentoring and individual/group projects/ assignments, exercises using Solver and excel etc.)
Presentations (Paper/Group Project) Case Study Chalk and talk Random Questioning Reflections Course room exercise Case Analysis
D. COURSE COMPLETION PLANSessions: 4 (lectures of 1 hour each) for a 4 credit course.Total hours per week: 4 hours per week.
E. EVALUATION & GRADING
Description Weight age Schedule
1. Continuous Assessment 30% Detailed Below
2. Mid term Exam 20% Academic Calendar
3. End term Exam 50% Academic Calendar
Internal Assessment: Marks 100 (shall be done based on the following 5 components):
Description Weight age Schedule:-
1. Continuous Assessment 30% Detailed BelowContinuous Assessment: (Marks 100 - converted to 30) shall be done based on the following 5 components: a. Two class tests 20 Marks [02 X10 Marks]b. One Assignment 20 Marks c. Project work 20 Marks (Abstract, Synopsis, final draft/ presentation)d. Subject grand viva 20 Markse. Attendance 20 Marks
Formula for attendance marks: 67-75 % 0 Marks75-80% 5 Marks80-85% 10 Marks85-90% 15 Marks
College of Legal Studies July.-December. 2014
90%-100% 20 MarksFive components will be used for internal assessment for this course (Total 100 marks), the details of each component is as follows:
a) Assignment:Assignment will be given on the pattern of End Term Examination and it must be hand written, to submit/present on a definite date. The assignment is attached with the course plan as Annexure-1 It will have 20% weightage. Individual Viva-voce will be conducted on the assignment.
b) Projects/Presentations/Case Analysis/Publication/Moot Court Participation/Court Room exercise: Weightage 20 %
Faculty has choice to select any one component:a. Project Topics covering entire syllabus and emerging areas with allotments. b. Land Mark current and old Cases covering the entire syllabus with allotmentsc. Moot Problem with allotments in groups
(i) The case analysis should be an individual work. While the project work and the Moot Court will be in groups.(ii) Total number of students is 60 therefore, 15 groups of 4 members each will be
formed. Ideally it should be mix of male/female and background-
c) Every Group would be asked to prepare a topic from the suggestedList and go through the primary/secondary data collection and analysis/interpretation and finally prepare a Group Report of Min. 20 pages.They are also required to make a presentation on that topic on a scheduled date (would be communicated in the class). The duration of a group presentation will be 15-20 minutes; followed by 5-10 minutes discussion/query session.
d) Students are encouraged to review research papers and write/publish papers jointly with the faculty.
Mid- Sem Examination: 20% Weightage
Mid- Sem examination shall be of two hour duration and shall be a combination of Objective, short theory questions and numerical problems.
End -Sem Examination: 50% Weightage
End-Sem examination shall be of three hours duration. The examination paper shall have objective & theory questions, short and long numerical problems.
Passing Criterion: minimum 40% of the highest marks in the class
Student has to secure minimum 40% marks of the “highest marks in the class scored by a student in that subject (in that class/group class)” individually in both the ‘End-Semester examination’ and ‘Total Marks’ in order to pass in that paper.
College of Legal Studies July.-December. 2014
Attendance
Students are required to have minimum attendance of 75% in each subject. Students with less than said percentage shall NOT be allowed to appear in the end semester examination. The student obtaining 100% attendance would be given 5% bonus marks for internal assessment.
Cell Phones and other Electronic Communication Devices: Cell phones and other electronic communication devices (such as Blackberries/Laptops) are not permitted in classes during Tests or the Mid/Final Examination. Such devices MUST be turned off in the class room.
E-Mail and LMS: Each student in the class should have an e-mail id and a pass word to access the LMS system regularly. Regularly, important information – Date of conducting class tests, guest lectures, syndicate sessions etc. to the class will be transmitted via e-mail/LMS. The best way to arrange meetings with us or ask specific questions is by email and prior appointment. All the assignments preferably should be uploaded on LMS. Various research papers/reference material will be mailed/uploaded on LMS time to time.
F. DETAILED SESSION PLAN
SESSION TOPIC READINGS
1.
Module 1:- Definition and Nature of the Law of TortDefinition, nature and history of the law of torts.
Pillai P.S.A., Law of Tort, 9th ed., EBC, 2008, pg- 2-3Singh, Dr. Avtar, introduction to the law of torts and consumer protection, 2nd ed. LexisNexis, 2009, pg-1-2Carol harlow, understanding tort law, sweet & Maxwell 200, pg1-27Iyer, ramaswamy; the law of torts; 10thed., Lexi Nexis, 2007pg1-3Case study:
Common cause, A registered society V. UOI, AIR 1999 SC 2979
Jay Laxmi salt works P Ltd V. state of Gujarat, (1994) 3 SC 492
2. Difference- “Law of Tort” or “Law of Torts.” Tort & Crime, Tort & Contract.
Pillai P.S.A., Law of Tort, 9th ed., EBC, 2008, pg- 1-6Singh, Dr. Avtar, introduction to the law of torts and consumer protection, 2nd ed.LexisNexis, 2009, pg-3-4Iyer, ramaswamy; the law of torts;
College of Legal Studies July.-December. 2014
10thed., Lexi Nexis, 2007pg 5-12Case study:
Ranganagulu vs Mullackal Devaswan AIR 1974 Ker 25
Kenny peen (1963) 1QB 499 (CA)
Rajkot Municipal Corpn V. MJ Nakum, (1997)9SCC 552
3. Basis of the tortuous liability
Pillai P.S.A., Law of Tort, 9th ed., EBC, 2008, pg- 12-24Singh, Dr. Avtar, introduction to the law of torts and consumer protection, 2nd ed. LexisNexis, 2009, pg-4-6Case study:
Rookes V. Bernard (1964)AC 1129 HL
Donoghue V. Stevenson(1932) AC 562
4.Basic legal maxims for Determination of liability; viz Ubi jus Ibi remedium,
Pillai P.S.A., Law of Tort, 9th ed., EBC, 2008, pg- 12-24Singh, Dr. Avtar, introduction to the law of torts and consumer protection, 2nd ed. LexisNexis, 2009, pg-4-6Case study:
Gloucester Grammer School case(14190 V.B. Hill 11
5. Injuria Sine Damnum and Damnum Sine Injuria.
Pillai P.S.A., Law of Tort, 9th ed., EBC, 2008, pg- 12-24Singh, Dr. Avtar, introduction to the law of torts and consumer protection, 2nd ed. LexisNexis, 2009, pg-4-6Case study:
Ashby v. White (1703)2 LR 938
6. Module 2:- Liability for the Wrong Committed by Other PersonPrinciple of Vicarious Liability and its basis,
Pillai P.S.A., Law of Tort, 9th ed., EBC, 2008, pg- 472-476,Singh, Dr. Avtar, introduction to the law of torts and consumer protection, 2nd ed. LexisNexis, 2009, pg-65Case study:
Lucknow Development Authority v M.K. Gupta AIR 1994 1 SC 243
College of Legal Studies July.-December. 2014
Donoghue v. Stevenson, 1932,AC 562;
Kasturi Lal v. State of U.P. AIR 1965 SC 1039;
7.Master and Servants, Principle and Agent, Partners of a firm
Pillai P.S.A., Law of Tort, 9th ed., EBC, 2008, pg- 484-518Singh, Dr. Avtar, introduction to the law of torts and consumer protection, 2nd ed. LexisNexis, 2009, pg-66-80Case study:
Dharangadhara chemical works ltd. Vs state of saurashtra AIR 1957 SC 264
Loyd v. Grame Smith &Co. (1912) AC 716]
General engineering services ltd vs Kingston and saint Andrew corp. (1989)1 WLR 69
8.
State’s Liability: Doctrine of Sovereign Immunity in reference to the Crown Proceedings Act 1947, Federal Torts Claims Act 1946 and Article 300 of the Indian Constitution.
Pillai P.S.A., Law of Tort, 9th ed., EBC, 2008, pg- 12-24Singh, Dr. Avtar, introduction to the law of torts and consumer protection, 2nd ed. LexisNexis, 2009, pg-75Ratan Lal and Dhiraj Lal on Law of Torts,26th ed. Lexi Nexis, 2012pg -173Case study:
Peninsular and Steam Navigation Co. Secretary of State for India (1861) 5 Bom. H.C.R. App. 2;
9.
Joint Tort Feasors, joint and several liabilities in payment of damages.
Pillai P.S.A., Law of Tort, 9th ed., EBC, 2008, pg- 518-525Singh, Dr. Avtar, introduction to the law of torts and consumer protection, 2nd ed. LexisNexis, 2009, pg-97
10.Module 3:- Negligence, Contributory Negligence and NuisanceNegligence as a tort and its various dimensions in
Pillai P.S.A., Law of Tort, 9th ed., EBC, 2008, pg- 160- 162Singh, Dr. Avtar, introduction to the
College of Legal Studies July.-December. 2014
the present world
law of torts and consumer protection, 2nd ed. LexisNexis, 2009, pg-179- 210
Case study: Donoghue v. Stevenson,
1932,AC 562; Bird vs Holbrook (1820)
4Bing 628
11.Duty, Foresight of harm as test of the existence of negligence,
Pillai P.S.A., Law of Tort, 9th ed., EBC, 2008, pg- 162-169, 178-196Singh, Dr. Avtar, introduction to the law of torts and consumer protection, 2nd ed. LexisNexis, 2009, pg-180
Case study: Donoghue v. Stevenson,
1932,AC 562;
12.Proximate Cause and Intervening cause, concurring negligence of the third person
Pillai P.S.A., Law of Tort, 9th ed., EBC, 2008, pg- 169-175Singh, Dr. Avtar, introduction to the law of torts and consumer protection, 2nd ed. LexisNexis, 2009, pg-180
Case study: Haley vs London electricity
board, (1964)3 All ER 185 HL
Dutton vs Bognor Urbon District Council, (1972) 1 All ER 492
13. Res Ipsa Loquitur, Injury Caused by Plaintiff’s negligence, Injury Caused by Defendant’s negligence,
Pillai P.S.A., Law of Tort, 9th ed., EBC, 2008, pg- 203-214Singh, Dr. Avtar, introduction to the law of torts and consumer protection, 2nd ed. LexisNexis, 2009, pg-220
Case study: Scott vs London & Katherine
Docks Co., (1865) 3H & C 596
Byrne vs boadle, (1863) 2H
College of Legal Studies July.-December. 2014
& C 722 Achutrao Haribhau Khodwa
V. State of Maharashtra AIR 1996 SC 2377 ;
14. .Contributory Negligence- Last Opportunity Rule Concurring Contributory negligence,
Pillai P.S.A., Law of Tort, 9th ed., EBC, 2008, pg- 215-233Singh, Dr. Avtar, introduction to the law of torts and consumer protection, 2nd ed. LexisNexis, 2009, pg-211-216
Case study : Butterfield vs forrester,
(1809)11East 60 Henley vs Cameron (1949)
65 TLR 17
15.Representation in Contributory Negligence and Imputed Negligence
Pillai P.S.A., Law of Tort, 9th ed., EBC, 2008, pg- 215-233Singh, Dr. Avtar, introduction to the law of torts and consumer protection, 2nd ed. LexisNexis, 2009, pg-211-216 Case study:
Davies vs Mann (1842) 18 M&W 546
Butterfield vs Forrester, (1809)11East 60
Admiralty commissioner vs S.S. Volute (1922) 1 AC 129
16.
NuisanceNuisance as a tort and History of Nuisance,Nuisance and interference with real rights,
Pillai P.S.A., Law of Tort, 9th ed., EBC, 2008, pg- 236Singh, Dr. Avtar, introduction to the law of torts and consumer protection, 2nd ed. LexisNexis, 2009, pg- 225-230Case study :
17. Essentials of nuisance, who can sue, who can be sued , difference between public and private nuisance
Pillai P.S.A., Law of Tort, 9th ed., EBC, 2008, pg- 237-254Singh, Dr. Avtar, introduction to the law of torts and consumer protection, 2nd ed. LexisNexis, 2009, pg-225,-230
Case study:Dolman vs Hillman, (1941) 1 All ER 355
College of Legal Studies July.-December. 2014
Municipal corpn. of Delhi vs subhagwanti, AIR 1966 SC 1750
18.Nuisance in conduct of Business,Defences and Remedy for Nuisance,
Pillai P.S.A., Law of Tort, 9th ed., EBC, 2008, pg- 237-254Singh, Dr. Avtar, introduction to the law of torts and consumer protection, 2nd ed. LexisNexis, 2009, pg-225,-230Case study:Kanti vs U.I.T. Bikaner, AIR 1998 Raj 108
19.Module 4: - General Defenses for the Tortuous LiabilityVolenti non fit injuria, Inevitable Accident
Pillai P.S.A., Law of Tort, 9th ed., EBC, 2008, pg- 394 -407Singh, Dr. Avtar, introduction to the law of torts and consumer protection, 2nd ed. LexisNexis, 2009, pg-41- 43Case study :
Hall vs brooklands auto racing club, (1933) 1 KB 205
Smith vs Baker, 1891 AC 325
Stanley vs powell, (1891) 1 QB 86
20. Vis Major (Act of God), Necessity,
Pillai P.S.A., Law of Tort, 9th ed., EBC, 2008, pg- 408-416Singh, Dr. Avtar, introduction to the law of torts and consumer protection, 2nd ed. LexisNexis, 2009, pg-42
Case study:Ryland vs fletcher, 1868 LR 3 HL 330Nichols vs Marsland, 1875 LRR 10 Ex 255
21. Statutory Authority, Judicial and Quasi Judicial, Parental and Quasi- Parental, Authorities.
Pillai P.S.A., Law of Tort, 9th ed., EBC, 2008, pg- 416-423Singh, Dr. Avtar, introduction to the law of torts and consumerprotection, 2nd ed. LexisNexis, 2009, pg-28, 37-40London and brighton railway co. vs Truman, (1885) 11 AC 45
College of Legal Studies July.-December. 2014
Metropolitan Asylum District vs Hill (1881) 6 AC 193
22. Act of Third Parties, Plaintiff’s Default, Mistake
Pillai P.S.A., Law of Tort, 9th ed., EBC, 2008, pg- 394Singh, Dr. Avtar, introduction to the law of torts and consumer protection, 2nd ed. LexisNexis, 2009, pg-1-2Case study:
R vs prince, 1875 LR 2 CC 154 Morrison vs Ritchie & co,
(1902) 4 F 645
23.
Module 5:- Torts Against Human Being and PropertyDefamation: Freedom of Speech and Expression and liability for Defamation in the civil and criminal law,
Pillai P.S.A., Law of Tort, 9th ed., EBC, 2008, pg- 40-42, 94-96Singh, Dr. Avtar, introduction to the law of torts and consumer protection, 2nd ed. LexisNexis, 2009, pg-1-2Case study:
Noor mohammed vs Mohd. Jiajddin, AIR 1992 MP 244
24.
different branches of Defamation: Libel, Slander and hybrid types of the Defamation; Essential elements of defamation
pillai P.S.A., Law of Tort, 9th ed., EBC, 2008, pg- 43-63Singh, Dr. Avtar, introduction to the law of torts and consumer protection, 2nd ed. LexisNexis, 2009, pg-112-128Case study:
D.P. Choudhary vs kumara manjulata, AIR 1997 Raj 170
Boydell vs Jones (1838) 4 M&W 446
25. defences and remedies for defamation
pillai P.S.A., Law of Tort, 9th ed., EBC, 2008, pg- 43-63Singh, Dr. Avtar, introduction to the law of torts and consumer protection, 2nd ed. LexisNexis, 2009, pg-112-128Case study:
Alexander vs North Eastern Rly (1865) 6 B & S 340
Merivale vs Carson (1887) 20 QB 275
College of Legal Studies July.-December. 2014
26.
Defamation in Blogs & Cyber age; Privilege, fair Comment and Criticism, malice and right of privacy.
Pillai P.S.A., Law of Tort, 9th ed., EBC, 2008, pg- 63-91
Iyer, ramaswamy; the law of torts; 10thed., Lexi Nexis, 2007pg46
Case study: Barrett v. Rosnethal, 112
Cal.App. 4th 749 (2003). Bill Mc Laren, Jr. V.
Microsoft Corporation, Courtof Appeals of Texas,Dallas (1999) WL 339015.;
27.TrespassTrespass to land
Pillai P.S.A., Law of Tort, 9th ed., EBC, 2008, pg- 97-112Singh, Dr. Avtar, introduction to the law of torts and consumer protection, 2nd ed. LexisNexis, 2009, pg-149-166Case study:
28.Trespass to goods, conversion, Passing off, Injury to trademark, patent & copyrights.
Pillai P.S.A., Law of Tort, 9th ed., EBC, 2008, pg- 113-124Singh, Dr. Avtar, introduction to the law of torts and consumer protection, 2nd ed. LexisNexis, 2009, pg-167-172
29.
Trespass to body- Assault, Battery, Emotional Distress, Malicious Prosecution and abuse of legal proceedings, Conspiracy,
Pillai P.S.A., Law of Tort, 9th ed., EBC, 2008, pg- 27-30Singh, Dr. Avtar, introduction to the law of torts and consumer protection, 2nd ed. LexisNexis, 2009, pg-103-108Iyer, ramaswamy; the law of torts; 10thed., Lexi Nexis, 2007pg 47-51Case study:Stephen vs Myers, (1830) 4 C & P 349Cole vs Turner, (1705) 6 MOD 149
30. False Imprisonment Pillai P.S.A., Law of Tort, 9th ed., EBC, 2008, pg- 31-39Singh, Dr. Avtar, introduction to the law of torts and consumer protection, 2nd ed. LexisNexis, 2009, pg-107 -109Iyer, ramaswamy; the law of torts; 10thed., Lexi Nexis, 2007pg 53-57
College of Legal Studies July.-December. 2014
Case study:Grainger vs Hill, (1838) 4 bing NC 212Joginder kumar vs state of U.P., AIR 1994 SC 1349
31.
Module 6: - Liabilities not based on fault:Principle of Strict Liability and applicability of it in India
Pillai P.S.A., Law of Tort, 9th ed., EBC, 2008, pg- 265-281Iyer, ramaswamy; the law of torts; 10thed., Lexi Nexis, 2007pg 739-758Case study:Rylands vs Fletcher, (1868) LR HL 330
32. Exceptions of strict liability
Pillai P.S.A., Law of Tort, 9th ed., EBC, 2008, pg- 265-281Iyer, ramaswamy; the law of torts; 10thed., Lexi Nexis, 2007pg 739-758Ratan Lal and Dhiraj Lal on Law of Torts,26th ed. Lexi Nexis, 2012, pg31-32
Case Study:Bolton vs Stone, 1951 AC 850Noble vs Harrison (1926) 2 KB 332
33. The Principle of Absolute Liability
Iyer, ramaswamy; the law of torts; 10thed., Lexi Nexis, 2007pg 737-808Ratan Lal and Dhiraj Lal on Law of Torts,26th ed. Lexi Nexis, 2012, pg31- 32
Case study:M.C.Mehta vs UOI AIR 1987 SC 1086Indian council for enviro-legal action vs UOI, AIR 1996 SC 1446
34. Module 7: - Remedies
Remedies – extra judicial remedies, judicial remedies- damages, injunction , restitution, writs
Pillai P.S.A., Law of Tort, 9th ed., EBC, 2008, pg- 526-529, 561-563,Singh, Dr. Avtar, introduction to the law of torts and consumer protection, 2nd ed. LexisNexis, 2009, pg-81-99
College of Legal Studies July.-December. 2014
Case study:Mills vs Brooker, (1919) 1 KB 555
35.
Remoteness of DamageVarious principles for fixing the liability and to ascertain the damages for the wrong committed viz “But for Test”, “Directness Test” and the “Doctrine of Reasonable foresight”
Pillai P.S.A., Law of Tort, 9th ed., EBC, 2008, pg- 526-529, 561-563,Singh, Dr. Avtar, introduction to the law of torts and consumer protection, 2nd ed. LexisNexis, 2009, pg-81-99Ratan Lal and Dhiraj Lal on Law of Torts,26th ed. Lexi Nexis, 2012, pg190-202Venkatesh vs city municipal council AIR 1975 Kant 62In Re Polemise case (1921) 3 KB 560Wagaon mound case (1961) AC 388
36. .
Module 8: Emerging areas of Tortwrongs relating to Domestic Rights, viz marital rights, parental rights, domestic violence, seduction of female child etc
Iyer, ramaswamy; the law of torts; 10thed., Lexi Nexis, 200, pg 111-115, 125-128, 77-79
37. .Rights in Cyberspace, Cyber trespass, Cyberstalking, Spamming, Invasion of Privacy in Cyberspace, Cyber libel, Cyber squating, .
Iyer, ramaswamy; the law of torts; 10thed., Lexi Nexis, 2007pg-32, 43-46
38.Product liability in a hi-tech environment Jurisdiction in Cyber tort
Singh avtar, law of consumer protection (principle and practice); 4th ed. EBC; 2004 pg 5, 102, 517, 6
39.
Module 9: Statutory TortMotor Vehicles Act,1988Chapter-X Liability without Fault (Ss.140-144)
Ratan Lal and Dhiraj Lal on Law of Torts,26th ed. Lexi Nexis, 201. Pg- 701-704Case study:
M.K. Kundhimohammed vs P.A. Ahmedkutty, AIR 1987 SC 2158
40.Chapter-XI Insurance of Motor Vehicles (Ss.145-164)
Ratan Lal and Dhiraj Lal on Law of Torts,26th ed. Lexi Nexis, 2012, pg 705-724Case study:
Yallwwa vs national insurance co. Ltd. (2007) 6 SCC 657
41. Chapter- XII Claims Tribunal (Ss. 165-173) Ratan Lal and Dhiraj Lal on Law of
College of Legal Studies July.-December. 2014
Torts,26th ed. Lexi Nexis, 2012, 725-732Case study:
Oriental insurance co. ltd. Vs Brij Mohan (2007) 7 SCC 56
42.
Module 10 Product Liability and Protection of Consumers’ Interest:Product Liability – theories of causation, defectiveness and proximate reason, tortuous misrepresentation and negligence
Singh avtar, law of consumer protection (principle and practice); 4th ed. EBC; 2004 pg 5, 102, 517, 6
Case study: Donoghue v Stevenson
43.The Consumer Protection Act and its applicationsDefinitions: consumer, good, services,Defects and deficiencies
Pillai P.S.A., Law of Tort, 9th ed., EBC, 2008, pg- 565-666Singh, Dr. Avtar, introduction to the law of torts and consumer protection, 2nd ed. LexisNexis, 2009, pg-244-256Singh avtar, law of consumer protection (principle and practice); 4th ed. EBC; 2004 pg 7-85Case study:
Lucknow development authority vs M.K. Gupta, (1994)1SCC 243
44..Restrictive trade practice and unfair trade practice
Pillai P.S.A., Law of Tort, 9th ed., EBC, 2008, pg- 668-676Singh, Dr. Avtar, introduction to the law of torts and consumer protection, 2nd ed. LexisNexis, 2009, pg-295-301, 344-342Singh avtar, law of consumer protection (principle and practice); 4th ed. EBC; 2004 pg 154-192Case study:
Ravneet singh bagga vs KLM royal dutch airlines(2000) 1SCC 66
45. Consumer dispute redressal agenciesSingh avtar, law of consumer protection (principle and practice); 4th ed. EBC; 2004 pg 108-806
C. Evaluation Scheme: Continuous Evaluation
Description Marks Schedule
College of Legal Studies July.-December. 2014
1. Continuous Assessment 30 % Detailed below
2. Mid Semester Exams 20 % Refer Academic Calendar
3. End Semester Exam 50 % Refer Academic Calendar
G. SUGGESTED READINGS:
G :1TEXTBOOKS: 1. Pillai P.S.A., Law of Tort, 9th ed., EBC, 2008, 2. Singh, Dr. Avtar, introduction to the law of torts and consumer protection, 2nd ed.
LexisNexis, 2009, 3. Ratan Lal and Dhiraj Lal on Law of Torts,26th ed. Lexi Nexis, 2012
G : 2 REFERENCE BOOKS1. Wienfield and Zolowicz, Torts, 18th Edi., Sweet & Maxwell 20102. Iyer, ramaswamy; the law of torts; 10thed., Lexi Nexis, 20073. Gupta, apar, commentary on information technology act, 2nd ed. Lexi Nexis, 20114. Tabrez Ahmad “Cyberlaw, E-Commerce & M-Commerce”. APH Pub.Corp. NewDelhi
2003.5. Kaushal, anoop, practical guide to consumer protection Law, 3rd ed. Universal
publication 20106. Taxmann’s , Consumer protection law manual with practical manual, 2008 taxmann
publication.
G: 3 WEB SOURCES:www.ssrn.comwww.jastor.comwww.manupatra.comwww.scconline.com H. Instructions
a) All students will be divided in groups comprising of 3- 4 students in each. b) Students are expected to read the concerned session’s contents in advance before
coming to the class.c) The session will be made interactive through active participation from students. The
entire session will be conducted through question-answer, reflections, discussion, current practices, examples, problem solving activities and presentations etc.
d) In the case study session all students are expected to prepare their analysis and answers/decisions in their respective groups. Any group may be asked to present their views and defend the same.
e) All schedules/announcements must be strictly adhered to.f) The complete syllabus would be covered for Viva-voce and one must be thoroughly
prepared to appear for the viva and strictly appear on given time, otherwise, he/she will loose the marks.
g) Late entry(Max. 5 minutes from the class timing) in the class will not be allowed.
College of Legal Studies July.-December. 2014
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Annexure-I
UNIVERSITY OF PETROLEUM & ENERGY STUDIES
COLLEGE OF LEGAL STUDIES
BA.,LLB(HONS.)/BBA.,LLB(HONS.)
SEMESTER
ACADEMIC YEAR: 2014 -15 SESSION: JULY-DECEMBER
ASSIGNMENT – 1
FOR
Law of torts
(LLBL241)
Under the Supervision of: Pooja Gautam
(TO BE FILLED BY THE STUDENT)
NAME: _______________________
SAP NO: _______________________
ROLL NO -------------------------------------
Section A (10 Marks)
(Attempt all questions. Each questions carryequal marks)General Question- subject matter
1. Write short notes on the following.(a) Medical negligence (b) Tort and crime(c) Private defence (d) Mistake.(e) ‘‘Statutory Authority’’ as a defence
Section B (20 marks)- Conceptual Question(Attempt all questions. Each questions carryequal marks)
College of Legal Studies July.-December. 2014
2. ‘‘Tortious liability arises out of breach of duty primarily fixed by law, this duty is towards person generally and its breach in reusable by an action for unliquidated damages’’ – WINFIELD. Explain the statement.
3. What are the essentials of false imprisonment what are the remedies available in the case of false imprisonment?
Section C (20 marks)- Analytical question(Attempt all questions. Each questions carryequal marks)
4. Explain the scope of protection of consumer under Consumer Protection Act. write a critical analysis
5. ‘‘The tort of passing-off in complementary to trade-mark law’’. Examine the statement and explain the difference between passing-off and tact of deceit.
Section D (50 marks)(Attempt all questions. All questions carryequal marks)
- Application Based Question(10 marks)
6. Amit was insured with insurance company. Deductions for the same purpose were made from his salary by the employer and deposited in insurance co.. Amit’s wife got ill and was admitted in insurance company’s dispensary for her treatment. However the condition of his wife continued to deteriorate. Later, the appellant got his wife medically examined in another hospital, reports of which revealed that his wife had been diagnosed incorrectly in the dispensary of insurance company and that the deterioration in the condition of his wife was a direct result of the wrong diagnosis. Amit sued the insurance company under the consumer protection Act. Decide, with the help of cases laws and also suggest what type of damages should be granted to him?
(10 marks)7. A bus collided against a tree which caused tyre burst in the rear wheel, causing injury
to a passenger. Owner took the defence, that the tyre was in good condition and that the burst was a vi major. Decide. And also describe the method of compensation calculation?
(30 marks)8. Employer hired Driver to operate a delivery van. Before allowing Driver to operate the
van, Employer checked Driver’s prior job references, required Driver to undergo a physical examination by a medical doctor, and provided Driver with extensive training in motor vehicle safety. Medic, the medical doctor who examined Driver, discovered that Driver had a sleep disorder that caused Driver to spontaneously fall asleep and that Driver had on several occasions fallen asleep while driving. Driver pleaded with Medic not to inform Employer of the sleep disorder. Medic agreed, and omitted this information from the physical examination form that he sent to Employer. Medic also sent a letter to Employer assuring Employer that Driver was “in all respects fit for employment as a delivery van operator.” Employer then provided Driver with a daily delivery route and paid him a monthly salary.
College of Legal Studies July.-December. 2014
While Driver was making deliveries for Employer, the van left the road and struck Pedestrian, who suffered severe injuries as a result. Pedestrian filed a lawsuit for the damages as a result of the injuries sustained in the accident against Driver, Employer, and Medic. a. Can Pedestrian prevail under the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur concerning Driver’s
alleged negligence? Discuss. b. What arguments will Pedestrian make in support of his claims of negligence, what
defenses can reasonably be asserted, and who is likely to prevail in a lawsuit filed by Pedestrian against: i. Employer? Discuss. ii. Medic? Discuss
INSTRUCTIONS TO STUDENTS
ON ASSIGNMENT SOLVING
1. All the questions of the assignment must behandwritten.2. To answer your assignment questions you need to access multiple information sources
likea. Your own prior experience.b. Regular reading of Books, Law Journals, magazines and News papersc. Reference Booksd. Browsing the internet for latest updates.
3. Please remember that due to the dynamic and rapidly changing global legal environment and the continuously realigning geopolitical situation, your answers should capture and depict the current contemporary information.
4. As a student of Law, we encourage to have a contrary point of view. But do ensure that you can provide a logical justification to this view supported by verifiable facts, figures, statues and decided cases by various higher courts.
5. Caution: Remember to provide original answers only as your Assignment submissions will be run through an anti-plagiarism software (Turnitin).
Annexure-II
GUIDELINES FOR PROJECT WORK
The project will be completed as follows:
1. Abstract: One page in around 300 wordsIt may be in 3 paragraphs
a. Highlighting the topicb. Areas of concern and expected solutionc. Scheme of researchd. Key words
College of Legal Studies July.-December. 2014
2. Submission of synopsisSynopsis should contain the following:
a. Statement of the Problemb. Survey of the existing literaturec. Identification of the issuesd. Objective and scope of the researche. Research Methodology adoptedf. Probable outcomeg. Chpterisation
3. Submission of Final Project report after approval of synopsis.a. Excluding the Cover page, index page and bibliography the main write up should
be around 20 pages. Single Space, Times New Roman, Font Size 11. Printed both sides
b. Project must have- Cover page stating Subject name, Title of the Project, Supervisor name, Student details etc.
c. Students have to follow a uniform method of citation (the suggested method is Blue Book 19th Edition) and must mention the same in the research methodology).
d. The main body of the project must contain- Introduction, different chapters, conclusion, recommendation, foot notes and required bibliography.
4. The project work shall a. Be focused on the problem b. Include current status of knowledge in the subject (literature review); c. Embody the result of studies carried out by him/her; d. Show evidence of the student’s capacity for critical examination and judgment;
and e. Be satisfactory in presentation so far as language, style and form are concerned
5. The student shall indicate clearly and extensively in his/her project, the following: a. The source from which referred information is taken; b. The extent to which he/she has availed himself/herself of the work of others and
the portion of the /project work he/she claims to be his/her original work; and c. Whether his/her project work has been conducted independently or in
collaboration with othe rs. 6. A certificate to the effect that the project work carried out by the student independently
or in collaboration with other student(s) endorsed by the student shall form the part of the submission for evaluation.
7. Every student who spends a specified period of time in an industry/organization/institute for reasons of work related to his/her project work, with prior permission from the Coordinator concerned will explicitly acknowledge working in the relevant industry/organization/institute.
8. All projects submitted by the students will go through the process of plagiarism check through the anti-plagiarism software (Ternitin). The report produced by the software
College of Legal Studies July.-December. 2014
will necessarily be as per the standards prescribed by the university. If the report is below standards the supervisor will reject the project and award zero marks.
9. The following Project topics should be taken Roll No. wise by the students in the class.
Project topics
R450213002 Aalekh Jain‘Intention’ and tort liability
R450213004Aashna Bhargava origin and importance of law of torts in India
R450213006 Abhinav . Damage as a constituent of Tort Law
R450213008Adarsh Raj Singh Mental Elements – essentiality in Tort
R450213009Aditya Kumar Malfeasance, Misfeasance and Nonfeasance in Tort Law
R450213010 Ahmar Abrar
Suits against Corporations Emphasis on case law development in UK and India
R450213011Aishwary Bajpai Act of God as a defence
R450213012Aishwarya Pophali defence of inevitable accident;
R450213013 Akash Gupta Analysis of the ‘eggshell skull’ theory
R450213016 Ambuj Tiwari Novus actus interviens
R450213017Ananya Badsha remoteness
R450213018 Ankit KumarCase law jurisprudence on the concept of Sovereign Immunity in India
R450213019 Ankit Kumar Case study : State of Rajasthan v. Vidyawati, and other
R450213020Anubha Pandey Public Law Wrongs
R450213021Anushka Trivedi Case study: Bhim Singh v. State of J&K,
R450213023Aparna Singh Sengar
Volenti Non Fit Injuria as a justification Concentration to be on both UK and Indian cases
R450213024 Aratrik Das Necessity as a defence under Tort law
R450213026 Arpit Arora Private v. Public necessity- judicial interpretation
R450213028Arunima Shastri maxim Salus populi suprema lex : analysis
R450213029 Arushi Accord and Satisfaction resulting in discharge of tort claimCollege of Legal Studies July.-December. 2014
Pandey
R450213030Ashmika Agrawal
Whittling down of ‘control test’ in relation to determining Master-servant relationship
R450213033Chandreyee Maitra An analysis of the constituents of false imprisonment
R450213035Debajyoti Chakravarty
Newspaper Libel Case law in India – are there landmark SC decisions?
R450213036 Debolina Roy‘Innuendo’ – impact of decisions of UK courts on Indian courts
R450213037Deeptanshu Mishra Truth as a defence to an action of defamation
R450213038Devesh Dhasmana
Privilege as a defence to a defamation suit Student needs to narrow down the scope
R450213040Divyanshu Gupta Malicious Prosecution
R450213041 Ebad Khan The tort of Malicious Falsehood Case law approach
R450213044 Himani Singh Development of the tort of Conspiracy in india
R450213047Ishan Dhengula Assault and Battery – concept and distinction
R450213048 Ishani Singh Damages for Nervous Shock Case law development in India
R450213051 Jessica Jacob
The tort of Intimidation as expressed in Rooks v.Barnard (1964) 1 All ER 367
R450213052 Kajal KumariTort of Defamation : its multi-dimensional scope
R450213053Kanak Dhanai
Case analysis: R. Rajagopal v. State of Tamil Nadu, AIR 1995 SC
R450213054Kanika Chhabra
Case analysis - Hyderabad v. Canara Bank, AIR 2005 SC 186
R450213057 Kirti Mishra Tort of continuing trespass: jurisprudential study
R450213058Komal Srivastava Tort of Dispossession
R450213059Krishnam Pandey Tort of Conversion of goods
R450213060 Kriti Ranjan
Caparo Industries v. Dickson, (1990) 1 All ER 568 – an appraisal
R450213062Kshitij Vaibhav Contributory Negligence
R450213064Loveleen Mishra
Principle of Res Ipsa Loquitor with respect to the tort of negligence
R450213065Manisha Yadav
Exceptions to the rule in Rylands v. Fletcher : position in India
College of Legal Studies July.-December. 2014
R450213066 Mansi Tiwari Occupier’s Liability and Duty laid on him
R450213067Medha Bhadauria Constituents of the tort of Nuisance
R450213068 Neha Rani Economic Torts – An introduction
R450213069Nikhil Pandey Cyber Torts – An Introduction
R450213072Nishtha Singh Award of Damages – Approach of Indian Courts
R450213073 Nupur Gupta Consumer’s rights : a comparative study
R450213074 Oorja Bhogal Medical negligence: a jurisprudential aspect
R450213075 P.Surya Teja Tortious liability of professionals
R450213077 Parul Baghel Exemplary damages : a way to teach society
R450213078Poorva Rathore Liability of state for the act committed by it’s officer
R450213079Prashaant Malaviya Torts against Business
R450213080Prashant Singh Doctrine of contributive Negligence: analysis
R450213082Prateek Semwal
Professional liability due to Negligence with special reference to consumer protection law.
R450213083 Pratyush . Liability under Motor Vehicle Act
R450213084 Prerna Tara Nuisance by obstructions of highways: case study
R450213085 Raheel Ali Judicial process in Tort
R450213087Reeya Mishra product liability: Indian position
R450213089Rishabh Shrivastava
Right to common property resources-right to pass and repass on pathways
R450213090Rishindra Vikram Singh Doctrine of sovereign immunity and its relevance in India
R450213091Roohan Kahuria Death by negligence : position in India
R450213092Rushil Aggarwal Product Liability
R450213093Saloni Rastogi Polluter Pays
R450213095Samridhi Sharma Medical Negligence
R450213096Sanchita Chaturvedi Hospital Waste Management
R450213097Sansha Mahajan MV Accident Compensation calculation
R450213098 Saptarshi Industrial NegligenceCollege of Legal Studies July.-December. 2014
Bhuyan
R450213099 Shami Anjali Public nuisance
R450213100 Shantanu . Medical termination of Pregnancy
R450213101Shashank Sharma Constitutional Tort
R450213104 Shilpi Sahu Class Action and its applicability under law of torts
R450213106Shivansh Agrawal Deficiency of professional Service
R450213107Shivanshu Shrivastava Common Employment
R450213108Shrey Prakash Public Utilities
R450213109Shreya Tandon Remoteness
R450213110Shriya Pandey Sound Pollution
R450213111 Shruti Sahni Industrial effluence
R450213112 Sonali Singh Privacy of the public men
R450213113Soumya Kumar Process liability
R450213115Sukanya Mitra Third Party Liability
R450213116 Surabhi Dhir Domestic violence
R450213118Ujjwal Kumar Sachan Doctrine of Heavy Purse
R450213119Utkarsh Kumar Shah Neighbours’ liability
R450213120Utkarsha Srivastava Ganga Pollution
R450213121Vidisha Swarup Present Position of people suffering in Bhopal Tragedy
R450213122 Vivek Kumar Coastal Pollution
R450213123 Yash Dubey
Vicarious Liability in Contract for Service and Contract of service
R450213129Abhishek Sinsinwar Air accident Compensation
R450213131Drishti Saxena Popularity of Tort cases in India
R450213133 Parima Garg Time study for MVA cases
R450213136Shweta Hundet Mental element in Defamation
R450213137Vidush Pandey consumer protection law - a critical analysis
College of Legal Studies July.-December. 2014
R450213138Yogendra Singh capacity under law of torts
R450213139 Aman Gupta defence of consent - its limitations
R450213140 Vishal Rathi Analysis of the common cause - a registered society case
R450213141
Sushant Kumar Saxena
Deficiency of professional Service
R450213142Aayushi Verma Common Employment
R450213144Aprajita Karki Public Utilities
R450213145Devanshi Singh Remoteness
R450213146 Pallavi Singh Sound Pollution
R450213148Abhishek Anand Industrial effluence
R450213149Tushar Krishnani Privacy of the public men
R450213150Humza Imtiaz Process liability
R450213151 Eshita Sand Third Party Liability
R450213152Akshay Pratap Singh Tortious liability of professionals
R450213153 Anuj Dewan Exemplary damages : a way to teach society
R450213154Suraj Raj Kesharwani Liability of state for the act committed by it’s officer
R450213155 Rama Ponagi Torts against Business
R450213156Vidhi Agrawal Doctrine of contributive Negligence: analysis
R450213157 Vijay MishraProfessional liability due to Negligence with special reference to consumer protection law.
R450213159Pulkit Rastogi
Principle of Res Ipsa Loquitor with respect to the tort of negligence
R450213160Prashan Rao Malik
Exceptions to the rule in Rylands v. Fletcher : position in India
R450213161Rashmi Shukla Occupier’s Liability and Duty laid on him
R450213162 Palash Kalra Constituents of the tort of Nuisance
R450213163Anshekka Gambhir Economic Torts – An introduction
College of Legal Studies July.-December. 2014