Tort law Tort law is a branch of the law which covers civil wrongs, such as defamation (insult) and

trespassing (intruding), among many other transgressions (misbehaving). If someone suffers a physical, legal, or economic harm, he or she may be entitled to bring suit. If the suit is deemed valid, damages may be awarded to the victim to compensate for his or her troubles. Torts arising out negligence are civil wrongs caused by negligent behaviour or a failure to practice due diligence. For example, if you are playing soccer in the street and you accidentally kick the ball through someone's living room window, this may be a negligence tort. Medical malpractice and other forms of professional negligence are also covered under the umbrella of negligence torts. Intentional torts are torts which involve a deliberate attempt to harm. Defamation is often viewed as an intentional tort, as is battery, fraud, false imprisonment, and interference with the economic operations of a company. Tort law also covers issues like nuisances, such as noise pollution. In order for a tort case to succeed in court, the lawyers must generally be able to prove that the accused party had committed the wrong in question, and that the client suffered as a result.
http://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-tort-law.htm

Principles in tort law: Strict liability: In some cases tort law imposes liability on defendants who are neither negligent nor guilty of intentional wrongdoing. Known as Strict Liability, or liability without fault, this branch of torts seeks to regulate those activities that are useful and necessary but that create abnormally dangerous risks to society. These activities include blasting, transporting hazardous materials, storing dangerous substances, and keeping certain wild animals in captivity. Vicarious liability: The tort doctrine that imposes responsibility upon one person for the failure of another, with whom the person has a special relationship (such as Parent and Child, employer and employee, or owner of vehicle and driver), to exercise such care as a reasonably prudent person would use under similar circumstances. The employer is charged with legal responsibility for the negligence of the employee because the employee is held to be an agent of the employer. If a negligent act is committed by an employee acting within the general scope of her or his employment, the employer will be held liable for damages. Absolute legal responsibility for an injury that can be imposed on the wrongdoer without proof of carelessness or fault.

Mens rea and actus reus Mens rea, a person's awareness of the fact that his or her conduct is criminal, is the mental element, and actus reus, the act itself, is the physical element. Criminal breach of trust: (Sec 405 C IPC) Whoever, being in any manner entrusted with property, or with any dominion over property, dishonestly misappropriates or converts to his

own use that property, or dishonestly uses or disposes of that property in violation of any direction of law prescribing the mode in which such trust is to be discharged. E.g. 2G scam Ultra vires: The doctrine in the law of corporations that holds that if a corporation enters into a contract that is beyond the scope of its corporate powers, the contract is illegal. An ultra vires act is one beyond the purposes or powers of a corporation. The earliest legal view was that such acts were void. Under this approach a corporation was formed only for limited purposes and could do only what it was authorized to do in its corporate charter. http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/written-employment-contracts-pros-cons30193.html The Indian Contract Act defines a contract as an agreement that is enforceable by law. An "agreement" is basically a promise or a set of promises that consists of the following components: A contract is an exchange of promises between two or more parties to do, or refrain from doing, an act which is enforceable in a court of law.

An offer: This is the starting point of an agreement; wherein one party (offeror) communicates his intentions to sell something or provide a service to the other. When a person signifies to another his willingness to do or to abstain from doing anything with a view to obtaining the assent of that other to such act or abstinence, he is said to make an offer An acceptance: This is the act of display by the other party (offeree) of his consent to the terms and conditions of the offer. Acceptance usually refers to cases where a person experiences a situation or condition without attempting to change it. http://lawcentre1du.blogspot.com/2006/08/case-lalman-shukla-v.html Also, a contract is considered valid if it is made with the free consent of both parties, for a lawful consideration and with a lawful object. The parties must also be competent and have the legal capacity to make a contract. According to the Indian contract law, a person is competent to contact if s/he has attained majority and is of a sound mind. Indian Contract Law: Stipulations for Remedies against Breach When a contract is breached, the aggrieved party may seek the following remedies from the other party: Suit for rescission or revocation: This entails halting further performance on a contract, absolving the aggrieved party of all its contractual obligations. Suit for damages: Damage or monetary compensation can be obtained by an aggrieved party against the loss or injury suffered due to a breach of contract.

Suit upon 'Quantum Meruit': This term implies as much as earned or as much as he deserves. A quantum meruit suit is basically a claim against the value of the material supplied or used under a contract, which becomes void on account of breach of contract. The Doctrine of Promissory Estoppel The principle of estoppel in India is a rule of evidence incorporated in Section 115 of The Indian Evidence Act, 1872. The section reads as follows: When one person has, by his declaration, act or omission, intentionally caused or permitted another person to believe such a thing to be true and to act upon such belief, neither he nor his representative shall be allowed, in any suit or proceeding between himself and such person or his representative, to deny the truth of that thing. Consideration is an essential element for the formation of a contract. It may consist of a promise to perform a desired act or a promise to refrain from doing an act that one is legally entitled to do. In a bilateral contractan agreement by which both parties exchange mutual promiseseach promise is regarded as sufficient consideration for the other. In a unilateral contract, an agreement by which one party makes a promise in exchange for the other's performance, the performance is consideration for the promise, while the promise is consideration for the performance. Consideration is the legal concept of value in connection with contracts. It is anything of value in the common sense, promised to another when making a contract. It can take the form of money, physical objects, services, promised actions, or even abstinence from a future action. Case: In 1892 The Carbolic Smoke Ball Co. advertised a 100 reward for anyone who used its Smoke Ball and yet contracted influenza. When a certain Mrs. Carlill claimed the reward, the company told her that it considered her claim 'impertinent' and referred her to its solicitor. It insisted that the offer of 100 was mere marketing 'puff' and not intended to give rise to a contract. She argued that it was a genuine offer which she had, by purchasing and using the Smoke Ball as advertised, accepted. Mrs Carlill won the case and the rules of 'offer' and 'acceptance' were established as a precedent in contract law. The Court of Appeal rejected the company's arguments and held that there was a fully binding contract for 100 with Mrs Carlill. Among the reasons given by the three judges were that the advertisement was a unilateral offer to the entire world that satisfying conditions for using the smoke ball constituted acceptance of the offer that purchasing or merely using the smoke ball constituted good consideration, because it was a distinct detriment incurred at the request of the company and, furthermore, more people buying smoke ball by relying on the advert was a clear benefit to Carbolic that the company's

claim that 1000 was deposited at the Alliance Bank showed the serious intention to be legally bound. It should be noted that an invitation to offer is not an offer. The following are only invitations to offer but not actual offers; 1. Invitations made by a trade for the sale of goods. 2. A price list of goods for sale. 3. Quotations of lowest prices. 4. An advertisement to sell goods by auction. 5. An advertisement inviting tenders. 6. Display of goods with price-tags attached. 7. Railway time-table. 8. Prospectus issued by a company. 9. Loud speaker announcements. Offer and Tender: A tender is not an offer to the public. It is in the nature of a continuing offer. It is different from general offer. A person who invites tenders for the purchase or sale of goods does not make an offer. The person who submits the tender is said to make an offer. Doctrine of privity of contract: "The doctrine of privity means that a contract cannot, as a general rule, confer rights or impose obligations arising under it on any person except the parties to it." Only parties to a contract can rely upon rights created by that contract No other person can incur liabilities under a contract to which he/she is not a party

http://www.lawteacher.net/contract-law/privity.php Intentions to create legal relations: http://www.4lawnotes.com/showthread.php/1439-Balfour-v.-Balfour Rational: The court reasoned that arrangements between husband and wife do not constitute a contract. This is because, according to the court, it is quite common and it is the natural and inevitable result of the relationship of husband and wife, that the two spouses should make arrangements for allowances. Moreover, they are not contracts because the parties did not intent that they should be attended by legal consequences. At the inception of the

arrangement, the parties never intended that they should be sued upon. Agreements such as these are outside the realm of contracts altogether. Capacity of parties: Its the legal competency of each party to enter in a contract. Legal capability of those involved in mutual assent of making a contract, including an insurance contract. Minors can enter into a contract, but it is voidable at the option of the minor. It is one of the requirements for a valid contract. Parties with less than full capacity include minors, the mentally insane, and those who are intoxicated. AGREEMENT = OFFER + ACCEPTANCE CONTRACT =AGREEMENT+ENFORCEABILITY AT LAW http://www.answers.com/topic/capacity-of-parties http://indiankanoon.org/doc/44251/ Consent means to agree to something. Free consent means to agree without coercion without being forced or threatened. The contract, to be valid must contain some ingredients. One of the most important element is the free consent of parties. The contract is the agreement between two or more persons. So there must be meeting of minds in similar manner. So the meeting must be voluntary. It must be free from any compulsion or pressure. A contract without free consent is not proper. Section 13 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872 says that when two or more persons agree upon the same thing in the same sense, there is consent. Consent can be express and implied. Section 14 of the Act goes on saying what is free consent. There are different elements the presence of which will compel someone to enter into a contract. So if those elements are present the contract is not formed by free consent. Those elements are as follows: Coercion (Section 15)-In order to cause any person to enter into any contract, one person commits or threatens to commit an illegal act as defined in Indian Penal Code or unlawfully detains any property connected with the other person or threatens to do so. Undue Influence (Section 16)-When a person in a position to dominate the will of other uses this position to obtain an unfair advantage over another in a contract. http://www.enotes.com/topic/Tate_v_Williamson Fraud (Section 17)- Every act, promise, omission intended to deceive forms fraud. Class of agreements (such as insurance contracts) in which one party (the promisee, such as an applicant) is under a fundamental duty to disclose all material facts and surrounding circumstances that could influence the decision of the other party (the promisor, such as an insurance company) to enter the agreement. Non-disclosure or a partial-disclosure makes such agreements voidable.

Misrepresentation (Section 18)- Misleading another in a contract comes under misrepresentation. http://peisker.de/ffa/Misrepresentation.htm Mistake (Sections 20-22)- Mistake is the erroneous belief either of law or fact by one or other parties or both. http://peisker.de/ffa/Mistake.htm Economic duress http://law.anu.edu.au/colin/Lectures/uncons.htm If one or all of the above elements are present in forming a contract, it is voidable. Section 19 of Indian Contract Act specifically says that when the consent to an agreement is caused by coercion, fraud or misrepresentation, the agreement is a contract voidable at the option of the part whose consent was so caused. Section 20 says that when both parties are under a mistake as to a matter of fact essential to the agreement, the agreement is void. Section 19A says that a contract in which the agreement is caused by undue influence, it is voidable. http://senseoflaw.blogspot.com/2010/02/free-consent-indian-contract-act.html Essentials of a contract http://senseoflaw.blogspot.com/2010/02/valid-contract-requirements.html article 19.1g 39 b 301 300 299 368 356 RTI IT Act FEMA/FERA Entity (such as a firm) other than a natural person (human being) created by law and recognized as a legal entity having distinct identity, legal personality, and duties and rights. Its also called artificial person, juridical entity, juristic person, or legal person.