Trespass to the person.
Trespass
to the person is the featured study in the January exam. There are exam
resources and featured cases available for the exam here.
Trespass to the person is a tort which allows a claimant to get compensated, after suffering unwanted interference i.e assault, battery or false imprisonment. The general principle is to protect a persons right to not be touched, squeezed, punched, licked, verbally attacked, or locked in a basement for 3 years. Unless you like that kind of thing, obviously.
It was more than likely developed in ye olde medieval times when there was highway robbers, burglars and knights that came out of nowhere and started jousting with you and that. This was a time with no police or sophisticated courts - victims had to get wrongdoers to pay for crimes themselves under writs of trespass.
Trespass to the person is actionable per se, which means the claimant does not have to prove damage, but only prove the tort has been committed. However if the claimant suffers no physical damage, less compensation will be recieved.
All 3 areas of trespass to the person are represented by criminal court, and whilst it is possible to get compensation through this, a civil case may be needed aswell/instead to get that all important cash.
It is easy to get trespass confused with negligence, so heres a quick guide to distinguishing them:
Trespass to the person is a tort which allows a claimant to get compensated, after suffering unwanted interference i.e assault, battery or false imprisonment. The general principle is to protect a persons right to not be touched, squeezed, punched, licked, verbally attacked, or locked in a basement for 3 years. Unless you like that kind of thing, obviously.
It was more than likely developed in ye olde medieval times when there was highway robbers, burglars and knights that came out of nowhere and started jousting with you and that. This was a time with no police or sophisticated courts - victims had to get wrongdoers to pay for crimes themselves under writs of trespass.
Trespass to the person is actionable per se, which means the claimant does not have to prove damage, but only prove the tort has been committed. However if the claimant suffers no physical damage, less compensation will be recieved.
All 3 areas of trespass to the person are represented by criminal court, and whilst it is possible to get compensation through this, a civil case may be needed aswell/instead to get that all important cash.
It is easy to get trespass confused with negligence, so heres a quick guide to distinguishing them:
Tort of trespass to the person.
A direct and intentional act of interference with the claimant
Throwing a brick at the claimant
Throwing a brick at the claimant
Crazy Guy.
Tort of negligence.
An act of interference which is not direct and intentional
Leaving a brick on the floor for the claimant to trip over.
Leaving a brick on the floor for the claimant to trip over.
Tripping Hazard.
