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


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


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.


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;


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,


Gloucester Grammer School case(14190 V.B. Hill 11

5. Injuria Sine Damnum and Damnum Sine Injuria.


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


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


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


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


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,


Case study: Scott vs London & Katherine

Docks Co., (1865) 3H & C 596

Byrne vs boadle, (1863) 2H


& 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


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,


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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.


http://www.scconline.com/

http://www.manupatra.com/

http://www.jastor.com/

http://www.ssrn.com/

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------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)


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.


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


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


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


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


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


Torts Course Plan

Documents

energy acresfax

hons energy lawscourse

law of torts semester

rd session

prem nagarwebsite

subject code

f01 cissueno

pooja gautamemail