|
|
by Eric Engle
A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z
List of Words and Phrases Defined:
ABSOLUTE LIABILITY / STRICT LIABILITY | GEFÄHRDUNGSHAFTUNG
UNBEDINGTE HAFTPFLICHT / DIE KAUSALHAFTUNG / DELIKTSHAFTUNG | RESPONSABILITÉ
DE PLEIN DROIT
ACCIDENT LAW | UNFALLRECHT
ACT | HANDLUNG / POSITIVES
TUN
ACTION AT LAW | KLAGE
ACT OF GOD
| HÖHERE GEWALT | FORCE MAJEURE
ACTIO PERSONALIS MORITUR CUM PERSONA / MORITUR DOKTRIN
AGENT | VERTRETER
| AGENT | AGENTE
Agente
agent
agent
Related Concepts: Principle, Master, Servant, Respondeat Superior,
Vicarious liability, Constructive liability
AGENCY | ? | REPRÉSENTATION
|
ALL-OR-NOTHING PRINCIPLE / FULL COMPENSATION PRINCIPLE) | ALLES ODER
NICHTS PRINZIP / GRUNDSATZ DER TOTALREPARATION FULL COMPENSATION
PRINCIPLE | PRINCIPE DE RÉPARATION INTÉGRALE
APPORTIONMENT
OF DAMAGES / APPORTIONMENT OF LIABILITY | SCHADENSVERTEILUNG / HAFTUNGSVERTEILUNG
ASSUMPTION
OF RISK | HANDELN AUF EIGENE GEFAHR
ASSAULT |
TÄTLICHE BELEIDIGUNG? STRAFBARE HANDLUNG | VIOLENCE
Strafbare Handlung
Violence
ASSETS | VERMÖGEN | PATRIMOINE
AUTONOMY
AVOIDABLE CONSEQUENCES RULE
| SCHADENSMINDERUNG
BATTERY | STRAFBARE HANDLUNG GEGEN LEIB UND LEBEN | VIOLENCE:
In German Law: Strafbare Handlung gegen Leib und Leben
In French Law: Violence
In Italian Law
BREACH OF CONTRACT | VERTRAGSVERLETZUNG
BIVENS CLAIM (CONSTITUTIONAL TORT):
BURDEN
Burden of production / burden of going forward with the evidence
| Behauptungslast/Darlegungslast/ Beweisführungslast | charge de la
preuve | onere della produzione della prova:
Beweisführungslast
Charge de la Preuve
onere della produzione della prova
Burden Of Proof | Beweislast | Charge de la Preuve | onere della prova
/ onere probatorio:
And Hearing of Evidence | Beweisaufnahme | administration des preuves
/ audition des preuves:
-C-
CAPACITY | RECHTSFÄHIGKEIT / GESCHÄFTSFÄHIGKEIT
| CAPACITÉ JURIDIQUE | CAPACITÀ GIURIDICA:
Rechtsfähigkeit (suggested translation: enjoyment of civil rights
| jouissance des droits civiques | esser titolare di diritti civili)
Geschäftsfähigkeit
Capacité juridique
CAUSATION
Cause, Proximate / Legal Cause | Näheste verursachung( ?) |
cause proche / cause prochaine | causa prossimale:
cause proche / cause prochaine
Cause in fact / But-for causality | condicio sine qua non formel
/ sine qua non
CHATTEL | BEWEGLICHE KÖRPERLICHER GEGENSTAND | PROPRIÉTÉ
MOBILIER
CHILDREN, MINOR:
Haftung der Kinder
Beschränkte Haftung der Eltern
Responsabilité
La responsabilité civile
Children and attractive nuisance-
CIVIL LAW / CONTINENTAL CIVIL LAW / CONTINENTAL LAW | KODIFIZIERTES
PRIVATRECHT (IN DER TRADITION DES CODEX JUSTINIAN
CIVIL LIABILITY | PRIVATRECHTLICHE HAFTUNG
CLASS ACTION LAWSUIT
CLEAR AND CONVINCING EVIDENCE
COINSURANCE ?
CONSTITUTIONAL TORT
COMPANY | HANDELSGESELLSCHAFT | SOCIÉTÉ
COLLATERAL SOURCE RULE : ~VORTEILSAUSGLEICHUNG
COMMON CARRIER | OEFFENTLICHER TRANSPORTUNTERNEHMER | TRANSPORTEUR
PUBLIC | IMPRENDITORE DI TRASPORTO PUBBLICO:
COMPARATIVE FAULT:
COMPENSATIO LUCRI CUM DAMNO / SET-OFF
COMPENSATION, EQUITABLE, FAIR | BILLIGE ENTSCHÄDIGUNG IN GELD
COMPENSATION IN KIND | NATURALRESTITUTION | RESTITUTION IN NATURA /
: RESTITUTION EN NATURE
COMPENSATION | AUSGLEICH
COMPENSATORY DAMAGES : IMMATERIALLER EINBUSSEN UND VERMÖGENSSCHÄDEN
COMPENSATION IN-KIND | NATURALRESTITUTION | EN NATURE:
CONCURRENT TORTFEASOR / JOINT TORTFEASOR | GESAMTSCHULDNER |
CO-AUTEUR DU FAIT DOMMAGEABLE / AUTEUR CONJOINT DE DELIT:
CONSENT | EINWILLIGUNG | CONSENTEMENT:
Einwilligung
Consentement
autorizzazione / assenso
CONSENT: INFORMED | AUFGEKLÄRTE EINWILLIGUNG NACH AUFKLÄRUNG
| CONSENTEMENT ÉCLAIRÉ | ASSENSO INFORMATO:
CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES | FOLGESCHÄDEN
CONSORTIUM, LOSS OF | VERLUST DES LIEBESPARTNERS | PRIVATION DE COMPAGNIE
CONJUGALE:
CONSTITUTIONAL TORTS | VERLETZUNG VERFASSUNGSRECHTLICHER FREIHEITEN
CONSTITUTION | GRUNDGESETZ/VERFASSUNG | LOI FONDAMENTALE / CONSTITUTION:
Verfassung
loi constitutionnelle / loi fondamentale / constitution
CONTRA BONOS MORES / AGAINST GOOD MORALS | SITTENWIDRIG
CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE | PART DE RESPONSABILITE DE LA VICTIME DANS
UN ACCIDENT / NEGLIGENCE CONCURRENTE / FAUTE DE LA VICTIME / IMPRUDENCE
CONCURRENTE / NEGLIGENCE CONCURRENTE | MITGEFÄHRDUNG :
CORPORATION | KAPITALGESELLSCHAFT | SOCIETE ANONYME (A RESPONSABILITE
LIMITE)
CORRECTIVE JUSTICE | GERECHTIGKEIT | LA JUSTICE CORRECTIVE:
CREATION OF RISK | GEFÄHRDUNG
CUSTOM / CUSTOMARY LAW | GEWOHNHEITSRECHT | DROIT COUTUMIÈR
:
Consuetudo.
Consuetudo est altera lex.
Consuetudo interpres legum.
Consuetudo loci observanda.
-D-
DAMAGES
Damages | Schadensersatz (in Geld) / Schäden
Damage, Actual | Konkreter Schaden | Indemnisation effective
Damages, Civil / Constitutional tort
Damages, compensation for | Schadensersatz | dommages et intérêts
| risarcimento dei danni
Damages, Constructive
Damage, Compensatory (opp. To punitive damages) | Ersatz eines eingetretenen
(materillen oder immateriellen) Schadens Ausgleichsentschädigung ?
| dommages-intérêts compensatoires / indemnité
compensatrice | premio di compensazione
Damages, Consequential | Folgeschaden (aus Primärschaden)/ Indirekter
Schaden | dommage consécutif / dommages secondaires / dommage indirect
Damages, Direct | | dommage direct
Damage, Divisible | teilbarer Schaden (bei Nebentäterschaft)
Damage, Emotional | Gefühlsschaden
Damages, exemplary | Exemplarischer Schadensersatz | dommages-intérêts
exemplaires |
risarcimento danni
Damages, General | Ersatz eines immateriallen Schadens | Courants danni
generici
Damages, Hedonic
Damages, Monetary | Vermögensschaden
Damages, Measure of | base d'évaluation des dommages-intérêts
Damages, Mitigation of | Obligation de limiter les dommages
Damages, Nominal | dommages-intérêts symboliques
Damages, Non-Economic
Damages for pain and suffering | schmerzengeld
Damage per se / actionable per se | Eine Rechtsgutsverletzung wird
einem kompensationsfähigen Schaden gleichgesetzt
Damages, presumed
Damages, punitive | dommages-intérêts punitifs
Damages, Ricochet | Abgeleiteter Schaden (ohne eigene Verletzung)
Damages, Special | Ersatz eines konkretes Vermögensschadens |
dommages-intérêts spéciaux
Damages, Treble / Treble Costs | Strafschadensersatz
Damages, Treble costs
DAMNUM SINE INJURIA
DECEIT | ARGLISTIGE TÄUSCHUNG | BETRUG
DEFAMATION | VERLEUMDUNG / ÜBLE NACHREDE / BELEIDIGUNG
Defamation and Public Figures
Defamation and the Constitution
Defamation and Opinion
Defamation, Fact or Opinion
DEFAULT / DEFECT | FEHLVERHALTEN / FEHLER (?)
DEFECTIVE PRODUCT
DEFENCE
Defence | Einwendung / Rechtfertigung
Defence, Affirmative
Defence, Dilatory.
Defence, Equitable
Defence, Full.
Defence, General
Defence, Legal
Defence, Peremptory
DEFENDANT | BEKLAGTER
DEFENDANT | BEKLAGTE
DELICT/TORT | DELIKT (~HAFTUNG)
DETERRENCE | ABSCHRECKUNG / PRÄVENTION
DISCERNMENT | EINSICHTSFÄHIGKEIT
DISCLAIMER / WAIVER |
DISCRIMINATION | DISKRIMINIERUNG
DIVISION OF THE BURDEN OF PROOF | BEWEISLASTVERTEILUNG
DUE CARE / STANDARD OF CARE
DURESS | ZWANG / NÖTIGUNG
DUTY
Duty of Care | Verkehrspflicht („Sorgfaltspflicht“)
Duty to act | Pflicht zu Handeln
Duty to ensure safe premises | Verkehrssicherungspflicht
Duty, Organisational | Organisationspflicht
Duty, Supervisory | Aufsichtspflicht
Due Care / Standard of care
Duty
No Duty Doctrine
Duty, breach thereof
-E-
EFFICIENT CAUSE
EMERGENCY | NOTFALL ?
EMINENT DOMAIN
EMOTIONAL DISTRESS | GEFÜHLSSCHADEN
EMPLOYEE VS. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR
ENTERPRISE LIABILITY
EMPLOYMENT
EMPLOYMENT-AT-WILL
EPEDEMIOLOGICAL PROOF
EQUITY
EVIDENCE
Clear and Convincing | hohe Wahrscheinlichkeit
See supra clear and convincing evidence
Beyond reasonable doubt | mit an sicherheit grenzende Wahrscheinlichkeit
Preponderance of | Überwiegende Wahrscheinlichkeit
Presentation of evidence | Beweisaufnahme
PRESENTATION OF EVIDENCE | BEWEISAUFNAHME
Evaluation of evidence | Beweiswürdigung
EXCUSE.
EXPECTATION DAMAGES | ERFÜLLUNGSINTERESSE
EXTENT OF LIABILITY | HAFTUNGSAUSFÜLLUNG
-F-
FAULT | (ZIVILRECHTLICHES) VERSCHULDEN
Comparative | Mitverschulden
Contributory | Mitverschulden
FEDERAL LAW | BUNDESRECHT
FELLOW SERVANT RULE | NICHT HAFTUNG DES ARBEITGEBERS, WENN EIN ARBEITER
SCHULDHAFT EINEN ANDEREN VERLETZT
FORESEEBILITY | VORHERSEHBARKEIT
FOUNDATION OF LIABILITY / BASIS OF LIABILITY | HAFTUNGSGRUND
-G-
GENERAL CONTRACT TERMS | ALLGEMEINE GESCHÄFTSBEDINGUNGEN
GOVERNMENTAL IMMUNITY
GOVERNMENTAL LIABILITY | STAATSHAFTUNG
-H-
HONOUR; REPUTATION : EHRE
HOSPITAL LIABILITY | KRANKENHAUSTRÄGERHAFTUNG
-I-
IMMUNITY:
INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR
INFORMED CONSENT
INSURANCE | VERSICHERUNG
First party | Schadensversicherung
Third party | Haftpflichtversicherung
Social | Sozialversicherung
IMMUNITY
Governmental Immunity
Types of Personal Immunity
Qualified Immunity
Absolute Immunity
Charitable Immunity
Corporate Immunity
Discretionary Immunity
Executive Immunity
Judicial Immunity
Legislative Immunity
Official Immunity
Ministerial / Discretionary distinction
IMPUTATION | ZURECHNUNG
IMPUTED NEGLIGENCE
INDEMNITY | ENTSCHÄDIGUNG
INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR | SELBSTÄNDIGER VERTRAGSPARTNER
INFORMED CONSENT
INJUNCTION | UNTERLASSUNGSANORDNUNG
INJURY | VERLETZUNG (EINES RECHTLICH GESCHÜTZTEN INTERESSES)
Personal| Verletzung körperlicher Integrität (Körperschaden)
INTENT | VORSATZ
INTENTIONAL INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS
INTENTIONAL INTERFERENCE WITH PROSPECTIVE ECONOMIC ADVANTAGE
INTENTIONAL INTERFERENCE WITH CONTRACT
INTENTIONAL TORTS | VORSÄTZLICHE DELIKTE
INTERVENING CAUSE / INTERVENING EFFICIENT CAUSE
-J-
JOINT AND SEVERAL LIABILITY | MITVERSCHULDUNG / MITGEFÄHRDUNG
/ GESAMTSCHULDNERISCHE HAFTUNG
JOINT TORTFEASORS:
JUSTIFICATION | RECHTSERTIGUNGSGRUND
-L-
LAW
LEGAL CAUSE / PROXIMATE CAUSE | ZURECHNUNGSGRUND
LIABILITY | HAFTUNG
Insurance, liability | Haftpflichtversicherung
Extent of liability | Haftungsausfüllung
Foundation of liability | Haftungsgrund
Joint and several liability | Gesamtschuldnerische Haftung
Insurance liability | Haftpflichtversicherung
Proportional liability | Anteilshaftung
Contributory negligence vs. comparative fault
Market share liability
Epedemiological Proof
LIBEL | MÜNDLICHE BELEIDIGUNG
Libel Per Se
LICENCE | LIZENZ
LOSS | SCHADEN
Economic / pecuniary | Vermögensschaden
Pure economic | Reiner Vermögensschaden
LOSS OF CONSORTIUM : VERLUST DES LIEBESPARTNERS
-M-
MALICE | ARGLIST
MARKET SHARE LIABILITY | MARKTANTEILSHAFTUNG
MASS TORTS | MASSENSCHADENSFÄLLE
MASTER AND SERVANT | ARBEITGEBER UND ARBEITNEHMER
MEANS OF PROOF | BEWEISMITTEL
MEDICAL MALPRACTICE | MEDIZINISCHE BEHANDLUNGSFEHLER
MINOR CHILDREN | MINDERJÄHRIGE
MISREPRESENTATION
MITIGATION | SCHADENSMINDERUNG
MONETARY DAMAGES | SCHADENSERSATZ IN GELD / GELDENTSCHÄDIGUNG
(?)
MORAL INJURIES | NORMATIVER SCHADEN
-N-
NECESSITY | NOTSTAND [?]
NEGLIGENCE | FAHRLÄSSIGKEIT (ALS DELIKT) / FAHRLÄSSIGKEIT
(ALS SCHULDFORM)
Comparative negligence | Mitverschulden (am: Quotelung)
Contributory negligence
Criminal negligence | Fahrlässigkeit als strafrechtliche Schuld
Slight negligence | Leichte Fahrlässigkeit
Ordinary negligence | Normale Fahrlässigkeit
Gross negligence | Grobe Fahrlässikeit
Per se negligence | Per se Fahrlässigkeit
NEGLIGENT INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS
NO-FAULT LIABILITY | GEFÄRDUNGSHAFTUNG
NON-DELEGABLE DUTIES | NICHT DELEGIERBARE PFLICHTEN [??]
NOMINAL DAMAGES | NOMINAL SCHADENSERSATZ / SYMBOLISCHER SCHADENSERSATZ
NON-PECUNIARY LOSSES | NICHT VERMÖGENSSCHÄDEN
NON-MATERIAL DAMAGES | IMMATERIALLER SCHÄDEN
NUISANCE
-O-
OCCUPIERS’ LIABILITY | HAFTUNG VON GRUNDBESITZERN
OMMISSION
ORDINARY NEGLIGENCE
-P-
PATENT | PATENT
PER QUOD (LIBEL PER QUOD, SLANDER PER QUOD)
PER SE (SLANDER PER SE, LIBEL PER SE)
PERSONALITY RIGHTS | PERSÖNLICHKEITSRECHTE
PLAINTIFF | KLÄGER
POLLUTION | UMWELTVERSCHMUTZUNG
POSESSION | BESITZ
PRESCRIPTION / STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS |VERJÄHRUNG
PRESCRIPTION PERIOD | VERJÄHRUNGSFRIST
PRIMA FACIE | ANSCHEINSBEWEIS
PRINCIPAL | GESCHÄFTSHERR
PRIVATE NUISANCE
PRIVACY | PRIVATHEIT / PRIVATER BEREICH
PRIVILEGE
PRIVITY OF CONTRACT | RECHTSVERHÄLTNIS ZWISCHEN VERTRAGSPARTNERN
PRESENTATION OF EVIDENCE | BEWEISAUFNAHME
PRIMA FACIE TORT
PROCEDURE
Civil
Criminal
PRODUCTS LIABILITY | PRODUKTS(GEFÄHRDUNGS)HAFTUNG
PROHIBITION OF ENRICHMENT | BEREICHERUNGSVERBOT | NI PERTE NI PROFITE
PROOF BY A PREPONDERANCE OF THE EVIDENCE (LIT. REASONABLY PROBABLE).
ÜBERWIEGENDE WAHRSCHEINLICHKEIT
PROPERTY | EIGENTUM
PROPERTY DAMAGE | VERLETZUNG VON EIGENTUM / SACHSCHADEN
PROXIMATE CAUSE | NICHT ZU ENTFERNTE URSACHE
PUNITIVE DAMAGES : STRAFSCHADENSERSATZ
QUASI-CONTRACT
-R-
REAL RESTITUTION
RECKLESSNESS | RÜCKSICHTSLOSIGKEIT / WILLFUL NEGLIGENCE / WANTON
NEGLIGENCE.
REDUCTION OF THE BURDEN OF PROOF | BEWEISERLEICHTERUNG [\?]
REGULATORY AGENCIES
RELATIONAL TORTS | (INDIREKTE DISTANZDELIKTE) [??]
REMEDIES | SANKTIONEN
RES IPSA LOQUITOR | ANSCHEINSBEWEIS
RESPONDEAT SUPERIOR | HAFTUNG DES ARBEITGEBERS FÜR DIE DELIKTE
SEINER ARBEITNEHMER (OHNE EIGENES VERSCHULDEN)
RESTITUTIONARY RIGHTS:
REVERSAL OF THE BURDEN OF PROOF | BEWEISLASTUMKEHR
RIGHT TO AN INJUNCTION | UNTERLASSUNGSANSPRUCH
RIGHT TO PRIVACY / RIGHT (OR RIGHTS) OF THE PERSON (OR PERSONALITY)
| PERSÖNLICHKEITSRECHTE: (LIT. RIGHT OF PERSONALITY)
Appropriation
Intrusion
Public Disclosure of Private Facts
Melvin v. Reid, 112 Cal.App. 285, 297 P. 91;
False Light
RISK DISTRIBUTION | RISIKOVERTEILUNG
RULE-EXCEPTION PRINCIPLE | REGEL-AUSNAHME PRINZIP
-S-
SATISFACTION INTEREST | GENUGTUUNG
SCHADENERSATZANSPRUCHEN VERSTORBENER REGELN
SERVANT | ARBEITNEHMER
SERVANT, PUBLIC | BEAMTER
SLANDER | BELEIDIGUNG (DURCH SCHRIFTLICHE ÄUßERUNG) MÜNDLICHE
VERLEUMDUNG; BELEIDIGUNG; ÜBLE NACHREDE
SOVEREIGN IMMUNITY
SPECIAL DAMAGES | EIGENEN SCHÄDEN
STANDARD OF CARE | VERHALTENS / SORGFALTSSTANDARD
STANDARD OF PROOF (ONUS PROBANDI)| BEWEISMASS
STARE DECISIS
STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS | VERJÄHRUNGSREGEL
STATUTORY DUTY | GESETZLICHE VERHALTENSPFLICHT
STRICT LIABILITY, ESPECIALLY STRICT PRODUCTS LIABILITY | GEFÄHRDUNGSHAFTUNG
SUPERSEDING CAUSE
SURVIVAL STATUTES | GESETZE, DIE DEN ÜBERGANG VON
-T-
THIN SKULL RULE | HAFTUNG AUCH BEI UNVORHERSEHBARER VERLETZUNG WEGEN
KONSTITUTIONBEDINGTER ÜBEREMPFINDLICHKEIT
TORT | DELIKT / UNERLAUBTE HANDLUNG
TORT, PRIMA FACIE
TORT-FEASOR | DELIKTSTÄTER
TORT-FEASOR, JOINT / CONCURRENT | MITTÄTER NEBENTÄTER [???]
TORT CLAIMS ACT
Federal Tort Claims Act
TOXIC TORTS
TRADEMARK
TRADE NAME
TRESPASS | VORSÄTZLICH RECHTSWIDRIGES EINDRINGEN
Trespass and battery and trespass vi et armis (vie-et-armes)
Trespass to goods
Trespass to land
Trespass to the person | Trespass vi et armis (vie et armes) / tresspass
force and arms
Trespass to chattels
Trespass on the case
TRESPASSER
-U-
UNAVOIDABLE ACCIDENT | UNVERMEIDBARES EREIGNIS
UNITY OF INJURY AND DAMAGE IN THE SAME PERSON | TATBESTANDPRINZIP
UNJUST ENRICHMENT | UNGERECHTFERTIGTE BEREICHERUNG
UNLAWFULNESS | RECHTSWIDRIGKEIT
UNLAWFULNESS, KNOWLEDGE THEREOF | UNRECHTSBEWUßTSEIN
-V-
VERSANTI IN RE ILLICITA IMPUTANTUR OMNIA QUAE SEQUNTUR EX DELICTO (WHO
ACTS CONTRARY TO THE LAW WILL BE HELD RESPONSABLE FOR ALL CONSEQUENCES
WHICH FOLLOW THEREFROM).
VICARIOUS LIABILITY | ARBEITGEBERHAFTUNG FÜR ARBEITNEHMERDELIKTE
(OHNE ARBEITGEBERVERSCHULDEN)
-W-
WARRANTY | GARANTIE
Implied warranty.
WORKER’S COMPENSATION | US-GESETZE ZUR REGELUNG VON ARBEITNEHMERANSPRÜCHEN
BEI ARBEITSUNFÄLLEN
WRONGFUL
WRONGFUL DEATH CASES | FAHRLÄSSIGE TÖTUNG (POSSIBLY: UNERLAUBTE
TÖTUNG)
WRONGFUL BIRTH/WRONGFUL LIFE
Wrongful birth | Farhlässig verursachte Gebeurt (eines gesunden
Kindes)
Wrongful life | fahrlässig nicht ermöglichte Abtreibung eines
(genetsich kranken) Fötus
WRONGFUL INJURY | UNRECHTE / FARLÄSSIGE VERLETZUNG EINES RECHTLICH
GESCHÜTZTEN INTERESSES
WRONGFUL BEHAVIOR | UNRECHTES / FAHRLÄSSIGES VERHALTEN
WRONGFULNESS | UNRECHT, FAHRLÄSSIGKEIT
Absolute Liability / strict liability | Gefährdungshaftung unbedingte Haftpflicht / die Kausalhaftung / Deliktshaftung | Responsabilité de plein droit
Liability even when there is no proof of negligence. Strict liability appears most often in cases of product liability where manufacturers are held legally responsible for injuries caused by defects in their products, even if they were non-negligent; liability that is imposed without fault.
The essence of a claim based on strict liability is that the degree of negligence of the defendant is irrelevant to the determination of their liability for the consequences of the accident. Such liability may be imposed because of the inherently dangerous instrumentality which is governed as a source of strict liability, for example, alcohol. Dram Shop Acts hold a business which sells alcoholic drinks or a host who serves liquor to a drinker who is obviously intoxicated or close to it, strictly liable to anyone injured by the drunken patron or guest. However some states specifically ban such liability by statute. Another example of strict liability is the attractive nuisance doctrine for example holds that where a landowner has land which has a dangerous feature which attracts children – a pond, a mine
The equivalent German terms are Gefährdungshaftung, unbedingte Haftpflicht, Kausalhaftung, Deliktshaftung and Gefährdungshaftung. Gefährdungshaftung however best conveys the concept of strict liability, i.e. liability without fault or liability where fault is irrebutably presumed. For example, the German regime of motor liability implicates any owner of a motor vehicle for the legal liability of all damages which arise out of the use of the vehicle. Drivers are also strictly liable, however drivers can reduce their liability by a proof of non-culpability. In cases of two damaged vehicles the damages to each vehicle will be used to offset the determination of the loss.
The equivalent French term is « responsabilité de plein droit ». The law of 19 May 1998 established a strict liability regime for manufacturers and furnishers of defective products, including defective medicines. The French strict liability regime, like the Anglo-American common law, is statutory and concurrent to the regime de droit commun (literally: common law regime, i.e. the regime of the French Civil Code). Similarly to the Anglo-American legal system the defective character of the product is not presumed. The similar defences, for example that the plaintiff was also at fault, can exonerate defendants under the strict liability statute.
See also: per se liability, strict liability
Rylands v. Fletcher, 3 H.L. 330; Clark-Aiken Co. v. Cromwell-Wright
Co., lnc. (Mass.), 323 N.E.2d 876.
A lay synonym for the law of tort. In the common law torts are either
negligent or intentional but are always distinct from crimes. However that
distinction, while typologically correct, is nevertheless somewhat illusory:
While it is true that in the civil law however some delicts are also crimes,
at common law for each intentional tort there was also a corresponding
crime. Thus the distinction between tort and crime at common law was procedural
and concerned the higher standard of proof in criminal cases where not
only fortune but also liberty could be deprived from the defendant.
Act | Handlung / Positives Tun
External manifestation of will. A failure to act is an ommission: both
may constitute negligence.
Klage could also be translated as “complaint”, i.e. the initiation of a law suit. Actions can be either at law or in equity with somewhat different rules of procedure and only judicial fact-finding in equity.
Act of God | Höhere Gewalt | Force Majeure
An unforseeable natural disaster which cannot be prevented. Where the injury is uniquely due to an ‘act of God’ it is a defense against liability. ‘Acts of God’ will not however excuse delays in fulfilling contractual commitments because the duties assumed are negotiated – including the responsibility for losses resulting from natural disaster. Thus if the duty of the party is in tort acts of God will excuse their liability. But if the duty of the person is in contract then the contractor must have included a clause covering ‘acts of God’ even though the misfortune was unforseeable and could not have been prevented. Most insurance contracts include clauses to exclude liability of the insuror for ‘acts of God’.
A latin maxim applie: Actus Doi nomini facit injuriam: An act of God does wrong to no one – thus no one is responsible in tort for the result of an inevitable accident.
Acts of God can be distinguished in the common law from force majeure: Acts of god are natural disasters whereas force majeure, at least in the common law, consists of man made disasters.
See:
Watts v. Smith, D.C.App., 226 A.2d 160, 162
Middaugh v. U. S., O.C.Wyo., 293 F.Supp. 977, 980.
Höhere Gewalt
In german law is defined as an unforseeable unusual result which was
brought about by irresistable force. The German concept is thus similar
to the common law and includes all manner of natural disasters and their
consequences. (See, Bundesamt für Sicherheit in der Informationstechnik
„Gefährdungskatalog Höhere Gewalt“
e.g. http://www.uni-saarland.de/verwalt/gshb99/g/g1.htm(1999)
Force Majeure:
Again the concept paralells that of höhere Gewalt and acts of god.
As we have already mentioned, force majeure as a concept does exist in the common law but is limited to man made disasters. In French law however force majeure encompasses all unforseeable disasters whether man made or not. Again unforseeability is the key element to the exclusion of liability which may arise via force majeure.
Actio personalis moritur cum persona / moritur doktrin
The principle that the cause of action of the victim of a tort died with the tort feasor. Statutorily remedied through wrongful death statutes.
See also: wrongful death, survival statutes
Mornand v. Twentieth-Century Fox Film Corporation, O.C.Okl., 37 F.Supp.
659, 652.
Humphries v. Going, O.C.N.C., 59 F.R.D. 583, 587.
Agent | Vertreter | agent | agente
An agent is a person granted the authority of another to act on their
behalf. The agent is subject to the control of s/he who grants the agency.
The grantor of the power of agency is known as the principal, and s/he
determines the extent of the powers of the agent. The agency may be gratuitous
or compensated and the agency agreement may be oral or written.
http://dictionary.law.com/
Agente
Vertragspartei des Agenturvertrages,welche die Verpflichtung übernimmt,dauernd
für einen oder mehrere Auftraggeber Geschäfte zu vermitteln oder
in ihrem Namen und auf ihre Rechnung abzuschliessen,ohne zu den Auftraggebern
in einem Arbeitsverhältnis zu stehen.
(Obligationenrecht,Art.418a Abs.1(SR 220)
agent
Partie du contrat d'agence qui prend à titre permanent l'engagement
de négocier la conclusion d'affaires pour un ou
plusieurs mandants ou d'en conclure en leur nom et pour leur compte,sans
être liée envers eux par un contrat de travail.
(Code des obligations,art.418a al.1(RS 220))
agent
Parte del contratto d'agenzia che assume stabilmente l'impegno di trattare
la conclusione di affari per uno o più mandanti o
di conchiuderne in loro nome o per loro conto,senza essere vincolato
ad essi da un rapporto di lavoro.
Codice delle obbligazioni,art.418a cpv.1(RS 220)
Related Concepts: Principle, Master, Servant, Respondeat Superior, Vicarious liability, Constructive liability
The agreement between a principal to grant a power to dispose his or her affairs to an agent. As a general rule, whatever a man do by himself, except in virtue of a delegated authority, he may do by an agent: qui facit per alium facit per se.
Agents are entitled to actions against third persons for torts committed against them in the course of their agency.
Agents are liable for their acts, both to their principals and to third persons.
The liabilities of agents to their principals arise from a violation of their duties and obligations to the principal, by exceeding their authority, by misconduct, or by any negligence or omission, or act by which the principal sustains a loss. Agents may become liable for damages and loss under a special contract, contrary to the general usages of trade. They may also become responsible when charging a del credere commission.
Agents become personally liable to third parties when they act outside the scope of their authority, when they do not disclose their agency, when they make themselves personally responsible, e.g. by contracting in their own name,
See: agent, principle, master and servant
Rorton v. Doty, 57 ldaho 792, 69 P.2d 136, 39.
Bevollmächtigte
The German term for a person empowered as an agent is the Bevollmächtigte.
A Bevollmächtigte holds a Mandat.
Agent / Mandataire
In French law, the concept of one empowered to transact business on behalf of another is also known as an agent. However an agent in France is not granted a power of agency. They French term for agency is mandat, and thus an agent is also a mandataire.
All-Or-Nothing Principle / Full compensation principle) | Alles oder nichts Prinzip / Grundsatz der Totalreparation Full compensation principle | Principe de réparation intégrale
Principle that where one has committed a tort that they shall be liable for all the damages therefrom, even where others are also liable. This principle also holds that where there is no negligence there is no liability whatsoever.
The logic of this principle is that the tort-feasors will have claims against each other. This general principle is however being riddled with so many exceptions as to be practically swallowed by them.
Apportionment of damages / Apportionment of liability | Schadensverteilung
/ Haftungsverteilung
Because the logic of German tort law distinguishes between determination of liability and the extent of liability it must also distinguish between the apportionment of damages and the apportionment of liability. However in the common law the extent of damages and the determination of liability are in principle equivalent, with the extent of damages exactly matching the finding of liability. There is of course the exception of joint-tortfeasors where a tort-feasors liability may exceed or be less than the damages but even there the joint-tortfeasor has, unless statutorily modified, an action against his confederate.
At common law, in cases of joint tort feasors, the defendant could make a claim against any tort feasor for all of the damages. Statutes have in some cases modified this rule. (Rangolan, v. County of Nassau and Nassau County Sheriff's Department, 749 N.E.2d 178; 725 N.Y.S.2d 611).
Répartition des dommages-intérêts is the equivalent term in French law.
Assumption of Risk | handeln auf eigene Gefahr
The principle that a plaintiff can waive their rights in tort by contractually assuming the risk for the injuries which they may incur in cases of dangerous conduct. Assumption of risk is an affirmative defense to a charge of negligence wherein the plaintiff is asserted to have assumed the risk of the injury. This assuming of risk may be either express or implied. The defense typically arises in cases of inherently dangerous sports such as skydiving or other inherently dangerous activities. Ordinarily the assumption of risk is found through express clauses in contracts which waive the tortious liability of the organizer of the dangerous sport.
An interesting question is whether one can "assume the risk" in cases
of strict liability (handeln auf eigene Betriebsgefahr), e.g. no-fault
auto accidents. The better argument is no, since strict liability functions
as a form of social insurance and as a way to avoid difficult burdens of
proof between inequal opponents, viz products liability.
See: Clarke v. Brockway Motor Trucks, D.C.Pa., 372 F.Supp. 1342, 1347.
Turcone v. Fell, 502 N.E.2d 964 (N.Y. 1986)
See also: consent, informed consent
Assault | Tätliche Beleidigung? Strafbare Handlung | Violence
Assault is the attempt to inflict an injury upon another whether recklessly or intentionally. No contact is necessary, a mere threat can suffice to constitute an assault. Assault can be most easily, if somewhat simplistically, be remembered as attempt at battery.
Assault (and battery) are rare instances where law French legal terms do not (at least since the revolution) have any paralell in the modern French law despite linguistic correspondence (assaut: to jump; battre: to beat). Instead we see the délit of violence, which comprises any act which provokes a physical or emotional (morale) disturbance – and thus includes threats as well as attempts and actual unwanted contact.
State v. Murphy, 7 Wash. App. 505, 500 P.2d 1276, 1281.
See: battery, intentional torts
Strafbare Handlung
In German law, an act which injures the body or health of a person’s
life or limb is punishable as a strafbare Handlung.
Violence
Violence is an act, whether deliberate or not, which induces in the
victim a physical or emotional disturbance with damaging effects on his
person or goods.
Assets | Vermögen | Patrimoine
The French concept of patrimoine is our point of departure as it is
most logical. All persons have a patrimoine which consists of créances
(credits) and avoirs (debits); there are of course non pecuniary elements
of patrimoine: yet patrimony (the nearest English term, which must be distinguished
from marriage, i.e. matrimony). The créances (credits) and avoirs
(debts) must be balanced to determine the “net worth” of the person, in
material terms. This notion of “net worth” or “capital” (whether personal
or real) corresponds to the German concept of Vermögen, which can
be translated as fortune.
The quality or state of being self-governing, especially the right of self-government.
Legally autonomy can refer either to the legal capacity of a physical person or to the interpretative independence of a branch of the law, for example the notion that tax law or constitutional law should have unique canons of construction and rules of interpretation from other branches of law.
Green v. Obergfell, 13 App.O.C. 298, 121 F.2d 46, 57.
See: capacity, children
Avoidable consequences rule | Schadensminderung
This rule is the mirror of the rule of consequential damages (Folgeschaden). Although the plaintiff has a right to all damages stemming from the defendants tortious conduct, they also have a duty to take reasonable steps necessary to prevent consequential damages.
Baglio . N. Y. Central R. Co., 344 Mass. 14, 180 N.E.2d 798.
See: intervening and superseding cause, proximate cause
Battery | Strafbare Handlung gegen Leib und Leben | Violence:
Harmful or offensive contact with the preson or another or with something closely appurtenant thereto, resulting from an act intended to create such contact or the in the apprehension thereof directed at the other or at a third person. Battery can either be the result of a negligent or intentional act. Battery may be justified for example as self defence, in aid of an authority in law or under process of a court of justice.
See: assault
In German Law: Strafbare Handlung gegen Leib und Leben
Die darin besteht, dass eine Person einen Menschen an Körper oder Gesundheit schädigt oder gegen diesen eine Tätlichkeit verübt. (VE)Schweiz.Strafgesetzbuch Art.122 RandT(SR 311.0); c.f. Körperverletzung
In French Law: Violence
Code pénal suisse at.122 tit.mag.(RS 311.0);d'après source;at.123,125
et 126;(EXP)d'après source;at.122 tit.mag.,123
tit.mag.,125 tit.mag.et 126 tit.mag.
Infraction contre la vie et l'intégrité corporelle commise
par quiconque porte atteinte à l'intégité corporelle
ou à la santé d'une autre pesonne ou qui se live sur elle
à des voies de fait.
-(VE)Code pénal suisse at.122 tit.mag.(RS 311.0) ; c.f. lésion
corporelle
In Italian Law
Reato contro la vita e l'integrità della persona commesso da
chiunque cagiona un danno al corpo o alla salute di una persona o commette
vie di fatto contro una persona.
(VE)Codice penale svizzero,art.122 marg.(RS 311.0)
c.f.; lesione personale
-Codice penale svizzero,art.122 marg.(RS 311.0);secondo fonte;art.123,125
e 126;(EXP)secondo fonte;art.122 marg.,123, 126 marg.
{DOM} diritto penale ordinario e militare
Breach of Contract | Vertragsverletzung
Failure without legal excuse to perform any promise which forms a part
or the whole of a contract leading to a right of damages on the part of
the non-breaching party.
See: intentional interference with prospective advantatge
Bivens Claim (constitutional tort):
A Bivens claim, named for Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Fed. Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971), is a tort created by judicial interpretation of the constitution which is not within the terms of the Federal Tort Claims Act. See 28 U.S.C. S 2679(b)(2)(A); 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983.
Prior to Bivens the remedies against constitutional violations by federal
agents and authorities were few and weak.
E.g. A Bivens claim would allege constitutional violations against federal employees as individuals.
Burden of production / burden of going forward with the evidence | Behauptungslast/Darlegungslast/ Beweisführungslast | charge de la preuve | onere della produzione della prova:
The duty of a party to present sufficient evidence to warrant a favorable finding on that issue or fact in order to avoid dismissal on a directed verdict. Once a movant has made a prima facie showing, i.e. a facial proof of his or her claim, the non-moving party must present evidence to rebut the assertion. Thus while the burden of proof remains on the originally moving party, the burden of production shifts to the non-moving party who must then present evidence which may or may not convince the finder of fact but which is sufficient to avoid a directed verdict, i.e. to place into doubt the position of the movant. The burden of going forward then shifts back to the moving party. The determination that the directed verdict is avoided is not however tantamount to an admission of the fact asserted but merely prevents a procedural disposition of the substantive claim.
See also: burden of proof
On burden of production see: Stuart v. D. N. Kelley & Bon, 331
Mass. 76, 117 N.E.2d 160.
Barnes v. U.S., 412 U.S. 837, 846, 93 S.Ct. 2357, 2363, 37 L.Ed.2d 380.
explains clearly the distinction between the burden of production and the
burden of proof.
Beweisführungslast
Pflicht,das Vorhandensein einer behaupteten Tatsache zu beweisen,wenn
daraus Rechte abgeleitet werden.
nach Schweiz.Zivilgesetzbuch,Art.8(SR 210)
Thesaurus des Eidg.Versicherungsgerichts(1997)
Charge de la Preuve
Devoir en vertu duquel une partie doit prouver les faits qu'elle allègue
pour en déduire son droit.
-d'après Code civil suisse,art.8(RS 210)
obligation de prouver les faits allégués
-Thésaurus du Tribunal fédéral des assurances(1997)
onere della produzione della prova
Obbligo di dovere fornire la prova imposto a chi vuol dedurre il suo
diritto da una circonstanza di fatto da lui asserita.
secondo Codice civile svizzero,art.8(RS 210)
Tesoro del Tribunale federale delle assicurazioni(1997)
Burden Of Proof | Beweislast | Charge de la Preuve | onere della prova / onere probatorio:
The burden of proof is the duty of one party in a lawsuit to prove the point which they assert. Ordinarily the movant bears the burden of proof, expressed in the maxim "actor incombit probari".
Different levels of proof are required depending on the type of case.
In a civil case the plaintiff must prove the elements of their claim by
a "preponderance of evidence" i.e. that their assertion is more likely
than not true. In a criminal trial the burden of proof required of the
prosecutor is to prove the guilt of the accused "beyond a reasonable doubt,"
a much more difficult task. Unless there is a complete failure to present
substantial evidence of a vital fact (usually called an "element of the
cause of action"), the ultimate decision as to whether the plaintiff has
met his/her burden of proof rests with the jury or the judge if there is
no jury. The burden of proof in some issues it may shift to the defendant
if s/he raises a factual issue in defense, such as a claim that s/he was
not the registered owner of the car that hit the plaintiff, so the defendant
has the burden to prove that defense. If at the close of the plaintiff's
presentation s/he has not produced any evidence on a necessary fact (e.g.
any evidence of damage) then the case may be dismissed without the defendant
having to put on any evidence.
Law.com
The defendant has the opportunity to submit evidence to rebut the plaintiff's case. The defendant will however have the burden of proving the rebuttal and also of any affirmative defenses.
In criminal cases every man is presumed to be innocent until the contrary is proved. Thus the burden of proof rests on the prosecutor unless a different provision is expressly made by statute.
On burden of proof see: Ambrose v. Wheatley, 321 F.Supp. 1220, 1222.
Barnes v. U.S., 412 U.S. 837, 846, 93 S.Ct. 2357, 2363, 37 L.Ed.2d 380. explains the distinction between the burden of production and the burden of proof.
And Hearing of Evidence | Beweisaufnahme | administration des preuves / audition des preuves:
The court procedure wherein the evidence is presented before the judge (and if applicable the jury) for the determination of the truth or falsehood of each fact asserted.
Capacity | Rechtsfähigkeit / Geschäftsfähigkeit | capacité juridique | capacità giuridica:
Legal capacity is the abilitiy of a person, whether natural or artificial, to perform civil acts . This concept is in fact somewhat confused because the notion of legal existence is confounded with the notion of capacity to alienate. Legal capacity in German law is clearly divided into two concepts: legal personality (Rechtsfähigkeit) and legal capacity (Geschäftsfähigkeit). While all legal persons enjoy rights and bear duties, only persons posessing legal capacity can voluntarily acquire or alienate rights and duties.
Also see: children
Johnson v. Helicopter & Airplane Services, 404 F.Supp. 726, 729.
Rechtsfähigkeit (suggested translation: enjoyment of civil rights | jouissance des droits civiques | esser titolare di diritti civili)
Ist die Fähigkeit, Träger von Rechten und Pflichten zu sein. Rechtsfähig sind alle natürlichen und juristischen Personen. Die Rechtsfähigkeit eines Menschen beginnt mit der Vollendung der Geburt (§ 1 BGB). Sie endet mit dem Tode des Menschen. Die Leibesfrucht ist also noch nicht rechtsfähig, wird aber durch eine Reihe von gesetzlichen Vorschriften bereits geschützt und ist darüber hinaus z.B. schon erbfähig (§ 1923 Abs.II BGB). Die Rechtsfähigkeit besteht unabhängig von der Deliktsfähigkeit und Geschäftsfähigkeit. So kann z.B. ein Kleinkind bereits Besitzer eines Vermögens sein, obwohl es noch gar nicht geschäftsfähig ist.
aus: E. Götze, "Rechtslexikon",
Fischer – Heymanns
Geschäftsfähigkeit
Ist die Fähigkeit, Rechtsgeschäfte selbständig und vollwirksam vorzunehmen. Der Gesetzgeber geht davon aus, daß grundsätzlich alle Menschen geschäftsfähig sind und daß mit Eintritt der Volljährigkeit die uneingeschränkte Geschäftsfähigkeit gegeben ist. In den 113 BGB sind deshalb nur die Einschränkungen bzw. Ausnahmen von der vollen Geschäftsfähigkeit geregelt. Geschäftsunfähig sind nach § 104 BGB Kinder bis zur Vollendung des siebenten Lebensjahres und die an einer krankhaften Störung der Geistestätigkeit leidenden Personen (es muß sich aber um ein dauerhaftes Leiden handeln und nicht nur um eine vorübergehende Störung).
Willenserklärungen, die Geschäftsunfähige abgeben, sind nichtig (§ 105 BGB). Nichtig sind auch die Willenserklärungen, die Bewußtlose oder vorübergehend Geistesgestörte abgeben.
Beschränkt geschäftsfähig nach § 106 BGB sind die Minderjährigen, die das siebente Lebensjahr bereits vollendet haben, aber noch keine achtzehn Jahre alt sind. Rechtsgeschäfte, die ein Minderjähriger vornimmt, sind nur dann wirksam, wenn sie dem Minderjährigen lediglich einen rechtlichen Vorteil bringen (z.B. die Annahme eines Geldgeschenks). Alle anderen Rechtsgeschäfte sind in der Regel schwebend unwirksam, bis sie vom gesetzlichen Vertreter genehmigt oder abgelehnt werden. Lehnt der gesetzliche Vertreter die Genehmigung (siehe Zustimmung) ab, sind die vom Minderjährigen vorgenommenen Rechtsgeschäfte von Anfang an nichtig (109 BGB). Allerdings sind solche Geschäfte des Minderjährigen wirksam, die er mit Mitteln seines Taschengeldes oder mit Mitteln, die ihm zur freien Verfügung bereitgestellt worden sind, vornimmt. Dies regelt der sogenannte Taschengeldparagraph (§ 110 BGB). Betreibt der Minderjährige mit Genehmigung des gesetzlichen Vertreters und des Vormundschaftsgerichts ein Erwerbsgeschäft, so kann er natürlich im Rahmen dieses Geschäftes auch wirksam Rechtsgeschäfte vornehmen. Eine solche Ermächtigung kann der gesetzliche Vertreter nur mit Genehmigung des Vormundschaftsgerichtes wieder zurücknehmen (§ 112 BGB). Ist der Minderjährige von seinem gesetzlichen Vertreter ermächtigt, in ein Dienst- oder Arbeitsverhältnis zu treten, so ist er bezüglich aller Rechtsgeschäfte, die im Zusammenhang damit stehen, voll geschäftsfähig (§ 113 BGB).
Nach Einführung des neuen Betreuungsrechts im Jahre 1991 ist die Entmündigung weggefallen. Geistig Erkrankte werden nicht mehr entmündigt, sondern unter Betreuung gestellt (§§ 1896ff. BGB). Hinsichtlich der Geschäftsfähigkeit stehen sie einem Minderjährigen gleich.
aus: E. Götze, "Rechtslexikon",
Fischer – Heymanns
Capacité juridique
La capacité est le pouvoir de conclure un acte juridique valable ayant pour conséquence d'engager le patrimoine de celui qui le souscrit.
Bien qu'elles soient capables de faire d'autres actes, il est certains engagements que pour des motifs d'ordre public et de moralité, certaines personnes ne sont pas habilitées à contracter, par exemple, le mariage entre proche parents. Le droit français n'a pas trouvé d'expressions propres pour désigner ces situations.On parle donc, indifféremment d'incapacité, s'agissant des mineurs ou des majeurs qui font l'objet d'un protection légale, et d'incapacité dans le cas où la loi interdit à certaines personnes de donner ou de recevoir des dons ou des legs lorsque le donateur et le donataire se trouvent entre eux dans des rapports qui font présumer une fraude ou une pression sur le testateur ou sur l'auteur de la donation.( voir les articles 903 et suivants du Code civil )
Textes : C.civil art.216,388 et s., 481, 488 et s., 902 et s. , 978
et s., 1028 et 1030 , 1039 et ., 1123, 1238, 1990, 1398 et 1399, 2115,
2157, NCPC, art 197, 1243 et s., 1271 et s.,
http://perso.club-internet.fr/sbraudo/dictionnaire/cadre.html
The notion that one event leads to another. Law distinguishes between remote causes which while necessary were not sufficient and material causes i.e. necessary and sufficient causes. Those causes but for which the accident would not have occurred are necessary but not always sufficent. When a cause is both necessary (legal causation, i.e. sine qua non causation) and proximate, i.e. sufficient, that is legal causation, then a tort will exist in common law. See: prima facie tort.
Cause, Proximate / Legal Cause | Näheste verursachung( ?) | cause proche / cause prochaine | causa prossimale:
A causal event which was both necessary and sufficient to result in injury. There is some confusion in the field as to the distinction between factual and legal causation. Factual causation is properly called cause in fact or causa sine qua non. Legal causation is sometimes refered to as proximate causation. Though a cause be necessary, and thus a cause sine-qua-non it is not always sufficient. Careful use of language here can avoid much confusion. The confusion arises because of complex fact patterns. It can be dispelled with terminological discipline. While all results require a necessary cause, not all causes are sufficient, and in cases where there are several sufficient causes not all causes are necessary since the other cause/s would be sufficient. For example, imagine a man who takes his two friends hunting. He drives them to the site and leaves. Each of them then negligently shoots the decedent plaintiff mistaking him for a wild animal. Each wound would kill the decedent: each is thus a sufficient cause. However as they are independent causes neither is necessary for the occurrence of the other. As to the driver: his causation is clearly necessar but is itself insufficient. Thus even were he negligent there would be no liability for his causation while factual, i.e. sine qua non, is not also legal, i.e. proximate. Both hunters will be held liable jointly and severally but may also have a claim against each other for indemnification.
cause proche / cause prochaine
événement anormal se trouvant le plus proche de l'événement
accidentel dans une chaîne causal
Arbejdslivets terminologi(HHK)
causa prossimale
Prof.Piero Mognoni,Università di Milano
Cause in fact / But-for causality | condicio sine qua non formel / sine qua non
The principle that the tort feasors action must have had a factual cause, i.e. a material cause, in bringing about the defendants misfortune. Note that the presence of material causation (cause in fact) is a necessary but insufficient condition to a determination of tortious liabilty. The defendant's act must also have been a proximate cause (also known as legal cause) - a sufficiently remote causa sine qua non will not lead to liability in tort.
On causa sine qua non see:
Hayes v. Railroad Co., 111 U.S. 228, 4 S.Ct. 369, 28 L.Ed. 410.
And for the legally synonymous cause in fact:
Medallion Stores, Inc. v. Eidt, Tex.Civ. App., 405 S.W.2d 417, 422.
Chattel | Bewegliche körperlicher Gegenstand | Propriété Mobilier
Movable things; personal property. Chattel are material objects, and not merely abstract rights or other non-corporeal property.
A person who while recognized by the law as having rights and duties has restricted rights due to their age. Minor children are under 21 years of age at common law but statutes have generally reduced the age of majority to 18.
Both the German and French law impute greater responsibility on children and on parents for the torts of minor children.
Haftung der Kinder
Grundlagen der Haftung: Bürgerliches Gesetzbuch (BGB § 823 Absatz 1) Wortlaut: "Wer vorsätzlich oder fahrlässig das Leben, den Körper, die Gesundheit, die Freiheit, das Eigentum oder ein sonstiges Recht eines anderen widerrechtlich verletzt, ist dem anderen zum Ersatz des daraus entstehenden Schadens verpflichtet."
Einschränkung:
· Kinder unter 7 Jahren können nicht haftbar gemacht
werden
· Kinder bzw. Jugendliche von 7-18 Jahren können
nur dann begrenzt haftbar gemacht werden, wenn sie zur Tat die erforderliche
Einsicht hatten und die schädigenden Folgen Ihres Tuns erkennen
konnten.
· Das gleiche gilt für geistig und körperlich
Behinderte, sowie für Taubstumme
ABC der Privaten Haftpflichtversicherung
http://www.aspect-online.de/prodinfo/abc_phv/haftung.htm
Beschränkte Haftung der Eltern
(1) Die Eltern haben bei der Ausübung der elterlichen Sorge dem Kind gegenüber nur für die Sorgfalt einzustehen, die sie in eigenen Angelegenheiten anzuwenden pflegen.
(2) Sind für einen Schaden beide Eltern verantwortlich, so haften sie als Gesamtschuldner.
Bürgerliches Gesetzbuch
Buch 4 - Familienrecht (§§ 1297 - 1921)
Abschnitt 2 - Verwandtschaft (§§ 1589 - 1772)
Titel 5 - Elterliche Sorge (§§ 1626 - 1698b)
§ 1664
Responsabilité
In French law, parents are liable for the torts of their children.
Le Code civil, dans Les articles 1382 à 1386, pose le principe
de la responsabilité civile délictuelle, c'est-à-dire
celle qui découle d'une faute ayant entraîné un dommage
qui doit être réparé. L'article 1382 dispose, en effet/
«Tout fait quelconque de l'homme qui cause à autrui un dommage
oblige celui par la faute duquel il est arrivé à le réparer.»
D'autre part, l'article 1383 précise que «chacun est responsable
du dommage qu'il a causé non seulement par son fait, mais encore
par sa négligence et son imprudence». Autrement dit, la «faute»
retenue peut être constituée non seulement par un fait proprement
dit mais aussi par une simple négligence ou une imprudence. Enfin,
il existe une autre forme de responsabilité civile plus particulière,
qui ressort des dispositions de l'article 1384, alinéa 1: «On
est responsable non seulement du dommage que l'on cause par son propre
fait, mais encore de celui qui est causé par le fait des personnes
dont on doit répondre, ou des choses que l'on a sous sa garde.»
La responsabilité civile
Responsabilité sans faute personnelle donc, responsabilité
«du fait des choses», qui vise le père et la mère
qui disposent du droit de garde et qui sont solidairement responsables
des dommages causés par leurs enfants mineurs; les «maîtres
et les commettants» qui doivent répondre du dommage causé
par leurs domestiques et préposés; les «instituteurs
et artisans» qui sont responsables du dommage causé par leurs
élèves ou apprentis. La responsabilité ainsi décrite
ne sera mise en jeu que si les père et mère et les artisans
ne prouvent pas qu'ils n'ont pas pu empêcher le fait qui entraîne
cette responsabilité.
Encyclopédie
http://fr.encyclopedia.yahoo.com/articles/sy/sy_978_p0.html
Children and attractive nuisance-
A potentially harmful object inviting or interesting to a child that would lure the child to investigate. Landowners are strictly liable for attractive nuisances.
Civil Law / Continental Civil Law / Continental Law | Kodifiziertes Privatrecht (in der Tradition des Codex Justinian)
No greater confusion exists for both layman and lawyer than in the innocent sounding terms “common law” and “civil law”. Both terms are polysemic and must be qualified with adjectives otherwise confusion is certain.
The common law corresponds roughly to the french notion of “droit commun”. It is the customary i.e. traditional law of England as expressed in the decisions of judges. Just as “droit commun” may be derogated by statute so to can the common law, that is statutes may abrogate or supplement the common law and much of modern law is statutory.
Civil law must first be distinguished from civil procedure – they are very different concepts. The civil law refers to continental European law in its narrowest sense the private law of torts and contracts and accessory laws appurtenant thereto. This is the sense generally ascribed to the term in French. However in the English sense the term is broad and refers to the system of statutory law and interpretation via non-binding judicial precedent and strongly influenced by academia which characterises the law of the continent of Europe.
These confusions arise not only due to similar and polysemic terms but also due to the fact that both the common law and civil law are derived from Roman law with however many local customary deviations. Thus while these terms often confuse their ultimate meanings stem from the same source.
Civil Liability | Privatrechtliche Haftung
Liability in tort for negligent, reckless, or imputed liability due to strict negligence. Liability not on the bases of private contract or other promise but because of social relations.
A lawsuit instituted by one person or group of persons on behalf of themselves and all other persons similarly situated. It arises for example in the case of mass torts and toxic torts (q.v.).
See also: Epedemiological proof, mass tort, toxic torts
A standard of proof somewhat higher than the ordinary civil standard
of preponderance of evidence/beyond a reasonable doubt, yet lesser than
the standard of a criminal trial where proof is required beyond a reasonable
doubt.
See Bivens claim
Company | Handelsgesellschaft | Société
Company law generally permits shareholders in the company limited liability for the torts of the company. Thus company’s must be distinguished from partnerships or other unlimited liability companies.
Collateral Source Rule : ~Vorteilsausgleichung
The collateral source rule holds that where a plaintiff is compensated
by a third party that third party compensation shall not be used to reduce
the award to the plaintiff.
See: Cortland & Packard v. Superior Court for County of Los Angeles,
59 Cal.App.3d 140, 131 Cal. Rptr. 418, 421.
Common Carrier | Oeffentlicher Transportunternehmer | transporteur public | imprenditore di trasporto pubblico:
A common carrier is a transporter who offers their services to the general public over a definite route and according to a regular schedule.
Common carriers are ordinarily liable for all property losses which
occur to the objects they are entrusted with unless they can prove that
the loss was the result of an act of God or the owner of the property.
Common carriers are liable to use utmost care in the transportation of
passengers but if non-negligent will not be required to act as insurors
of their passengers.
Tilson v. Ford Motor Co., D.C.Mich., 130 F.Supp. 676, 678.
A modern doctrine of tort law which permits plaintiff and defendant to compare their liability for the accident. The plaintiffs award for damages will be reduced in proportion to their negligence. See e.g.
Huerta v. New York City Transit Authority,
735 N.Y.S.2d 5; 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12139
(comparative fault reducing plaintiff’s award in damages).
The rule of comparative fault replaces the all-or-nothing rule (q.v.). See contributor negligence.
Compensatio lucri cum damno / Set-off
The principle that advantages (positive externalities) which accrue to the victim of the defendant's torts shall offset the award in damages which the defendant shall receive to compensate their loss. This is similar to the collateral source rule but not the same since the diminution of the damages is not due to some exteranl source but due to the positive effect of the damage. It is also similar to, but not exactly the same as the Bereicherungsverbot / Prohibition of enrichment to the plaintiff. Both prevent overcompensation but using different methods. Compensatio lucri cum damno looks at the benefit to the plaintiff in measuring each element of the damages, whereas the prohibition of enrichment looks at the entire damage award and compares it with the entire damages suffered.
For example, the tortfeasors action destroys an old house and shed. The shed could not be repaired and was to be removed: the cost of removing the shed would be deducted from the damages for destroying the house.
Compensation, equitable, fair | Billige Entschädigung in Geld
The German principle of Billige Entschädigung in Geld holds that losses of a non pecuniary nature, i.e. losses for pain and suffering, shall only be compensated to a reasonable degree. This principle of law does not express itself as exactly in the common law, and as a result leads to excessive damage awards. Judicial over-compensation at common law is however sometimes corrected by statutory ceilings on damages.
On compensation see: Hughson Condensed Milk Co. v. State Board of Equalization, 23 Cal.App.2d 281, 73 P.2d 290, 292.
Compensation in kind | Naturalrestitution | Restitution in natura / : Restitution en nature
The remedy to the victim of the tort of replacement of that which was destroyed or removed by the tort feasor. Rather than restoring the victims loss with money the loss is repaired by restitution of the thing injured. E.g. a court orders a defendant to repair the car of the victim.
Natural restitution seeks to restore the injured object to the condition it had prior to injury.
One of the grand rationales of tort law. The remedy of the defendant shall be measured by their loss (rather than by the benefit to the plaintiff or by the social desirability of that compensation or out of a desire to punish or deter).
Compensatory damages : Immaterialler Einbussen und Vermögensschäden
Compensation seeks to remedy not merely the injured economic value but
also the pain and suffering to the defendant. The former is known as pecuniary
losses (Vermögenscschäden) and the latter as non-material damages
(Immaterieller Einbussen)
See: Northwestem Nat. Cas. Co. v. McNulty, C.A.Fla., 307 F.2d 432,
434.
Compensation in-kind | Naturalrestitution | en nature:
Restitution or compensation of the thing injured in a form other than money but not including the right of satisfaction. E.g. a defendant who has lost their crop due to a neighboring farmer’s negligence might be compensated in grain rather than cash.
Concurrent tortfeasor / Joint tortfeasor | Gesamtschuldner | co-auteur du fait dommageable / auteur conjoint de délit:
Two or more persons whose negligence brings about the misfortune of another. At common law each of the joint tort-feasors is liable in the entirety for the damages to the plaintiff. Though the plaintiff cannot recover more than their damages they can choose to recover all or part of their damage from any of the joint tort-feasors regardless of their actual proportion of liability for the accident. Joint tort-feasors however will have an action against each other if the injury committed by one was less than the restitution that they paid. Some jurisdictions tend to abandon this rule in favor of allowing recovery against either tort feasor only to the extent of the injury they inflict.
See, e.g. Fancyboy v. Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, 984 P.2d
1128; 1999 Alas.
“By popular initiative, Alaska has abolished the system of joint and
several liability, in which each tortfeasor could be fully liable for the
injured party's damages and seek contribution or indemnity from any other
joint tortfeasor. See Robinson v. Alaska Properties and Inv., Inc., 878
F. Supp. 1318, 1321 (D. Alaska 1995); Benner v. Wichman, 874 P.2d 949,
955 (Alaska 1994). Thus, a plaintiff "[can] only recover from each tortfeasor
in the proportion that his fault played to the total fault of all the persons
and entities at fault including the plaintiff herself."
Robinson, 878 F. Supp. at 1321.
Also see: Radford-Shelton & Associates Dental Laboratory, lnc. v. Saint Francis Hospi- tal, lnc., Okl.App., 569 P.2d 506, 509.
American Tobacco Co. v. Transport Corp., O.C.Va., 277 F.Supp. 457, 461.
Bowen v. Iowa Nat. Mut. Ins. Co., 270 N.C. 486, 155 S.E.2d 238, 242.
Consent | Einwilligung | Consentement:
The free choice of a person posessing their mental faculties to undertake an act.
Consent can be express or implied. It is express when manifested with words whether written or oral and implied when not expressed by words but by actions.
Fraudulent consent is no consent and so to is the consent of those who are legally not in posession of their faculties due to youth, age, or mental infirmity.
Consent is an affirmative defense against an accusation of tortious conduct.
Einwilligung
Erforderliche Zustimmung zu einem von einer anderen Person vorzunehmenden
Rechtsgeschäft,wenn diese vor dessen Abschluß erteilt wird
(ablers Lex des Wirtschaftsrechts,1972)
EuroDicAutom
Consentement
Le consentement peut se définir comme la volonté d'engager sa personne ou ses biens, ou les deux à la fois . Cette approbation peut conditionner la validité de l'engagement d'une autre , comme c'est le cas du mariage des mineurs . Cette adhésion est dite "expresse" , lorsque la volonté de celui qui s'engage se manifeste d'une manière apparente , par exemple par la signature d'un écrit ou par une déclaration faite en public , et elle est dite " tacite" quand l' accord de la personne résulte d'une attitude non équivoque de laquelle on peu le déduire comme la prise de livraison d'une chose achetée.
Sa preuve est quelquefois soumises à des conditions de formes destinées à constituer une preuve irréfutable de l'engagement , par exemple lorsque la validité d'un acte est subordonnée à sa réception par un notaire tel qu'un legs , ou par le Maire de la Commune lorsqu'il est appelé à constater l'accord des futurs époux à leur mariage . Pour esxprimer cette notion, les textes juridiques utilisent des expressions équivalentes telles que , "Acceptation", "Acquiescement" , " Agrément",ou "Ratification" qui cependant ,s'ils ont un sens approchant n'est cependant pas toujours identique à la signification du mot "consentement ".
Textes
Code civil art. 230 et s.,246, 345 et s,390, 1109, 1146 et s., 1690,
1257, 1261, 1690, 1985 .
autorizzazione / assenso
consenso dato da un terzo ad un accordo intervenuto fra due o più
altre parti
(Dott Coppola,Cons Min Lavoro e Previdenza Sociale,Roma)
EuroDicAutom
Consent: Informed | aufgeklärte Einwilligung nach Aufklärung | consentement éclairé | assenso informato:
Informed consent is that consent obtained only after full disclosure,
i.e. after informing the defendant of the medical risks and benefits and
alternatives of a medical procedure proposed by a physician. It is
a heightened form of consent applied in the field of medical practice to
protect lay persons. See, e.g.
Tenuto v. Lederle Laboratories,
1997 N.Y. LEXIS 3219, *; 90 N.Y.2d 606;
687 N.E.2d 1300; 665 N.Y.S.2d 17
Consequential damages | Folgeschäden
Damages which arise not immediately after the initial injury but thereafter yet as a result of the tort. E.g. as a result of a libel the plaintiff cannot marry and so will not be an heir of their spouses parents. The lost inheritance could be seen as a consequential damage.
See: Richmond Redevelopment and Housing Authority v. Richmond Redevelopment and Housing Authority v. Laburnum Const. 195 Va. 827, 80 S.E.2d 574, 580.
Consortium, Loss of | Verlust des Liebespartners | privation de compagnie conjugale:
The loss of the ability to have normal sexual relations with one’s spouse,
but also the loss of their services and companionship. It is a damage with
both economic, though possibly unremunerated, and non-economic elements
- and one more example of damage inflation in the common law of torts.
See: Deems v. Westem Maryland Ry. Co., 247 Md. 95, 231 A.2d 514, 517.
Constitutional Torts | Verletzung verfassungsrechtlicher Freiheiten
While Germany and France have specialized courts for hearing constitutional cases this is not the case in the U.S. See Bivens Claim.
Constitution | Grundgesetz/Verfassung | Loi Fondamentale / Constitution:
Latin. constituere, to make to stand together, to establish. Originally, an important decree or edict. Later, the laws and usages which gave a government its characteristic features.
The fundamental law of the state (e.g., Grundgesetz)
The constitution of the state may refer literally to the legal arrangements which characterise the state or metaphorically to the institutions and relations of the organs of the state across time. We concern ourselves here with the former, that is the literal legal definition.
In the common law constitutions are termed either written or unwritten. The United Kingdom has an unwritten or customary constitution, whereas that of the United States is written. A written constitution can be the basis of judicial review, and under British rulings since Coke, an unwritten constitution cannot be the basis of judicial review.
Verfassung
die Gesamtheit der geschriebenen oder ungeschriebenen Rechtsnormen,welche die Grundordnung eines Staates festlegen
loi constitutionnelle / loi fondamentale / constitution
loi ou ensemble de lois fondamentales qui règle le mode de délégation ou d'exercice de la souveraineté nationale, la forme du gouvernement, les attributions et le fonctionnement des pouvoirs de l'Etat ..
Contra bonos Mores / Against Good Morals | Sittenwidrig
No contract may be made which is against good morals. Such contracts are void as against public policy.
Contributory negligence | Part de responsabilité de la victime dans un accident / Négligence concurrente / Faute de la victime / Imprudence concurrente / négligence concurrente | Mitgefährdung :
Contributory negligence is that situation where the plaintiff’s own negligence helped bring about the tort. In most American jurisdictions it has been replaced with the doctrine of comparative fault. But in those jurisdictions where it survives, a finding of contributory negligence on the part of the plaintiff will operate as a complete bar to he plaintiff’s claim. Contributory negligence is an affirmative defense which the defendant must plead and prove to prevail.
See also: proportional liability
Honaker v. Crutchfield, 247 Ky. 495, 57 S.W.2d 502.
Li v. Yellow Cab Co. of California,
13 Cal.3d 804, 119 Cal.Rptr. 858, 532 P.2d 1226.
Cowan v. Dean,
81 S.D. 486, 137 N.W.2d 337, 341
Corporation | Kapitalgesellschaft | Société Anonyme (à responsabilité limité)
A legally recognized person having a legal existence independent of its shareholders, officers, and employees. While the employees and officers may be liable for negligence the shareholders of the corporation are limited in liability for the torts of the corporation to the extent of their investment in the corporation.
Corrective Justice | Gerechtigkeit | La Justice Corrective:
Justice has been defined as giving each man his due. Justice may be distributive or commutative. Distributive justice distributes rewards and punishments to each one according to his merits, observing a just proportion by comparing one person or fact with another, so that neither equal persons have unequal things, nor unequal persons things equal. It is also known as geometric justice.
Commutative justice renders to every one what belongs to him, as nearly as may be, or that which governs contracts. It is also known as arithmetic justice.
Internal justice is the conformity of our will, and external justice
the conformity of our actions to the law, at least where the law is just.
Creation of Risk
| Gefährdung ???
Custom / Customary Law | Gewohnheitsrecht | Droit Coutumièr
:
A usage which has acquired the force of law. When the usage is public, peaceable, uniform, general, continued, reasonable and certain, and has lasted since time immemorial it acquires the force of law and is known as a custom. While statute can and does replace prior custom, statutes must be interpreted in light of custom when there is doubt as to their meaning: optima est legum interpres consuetudo. A custom derives its force from the tacit consent of the legislature and the people,
Customs can be general or particular customs. Particular customs are
lex loci Particular customs are those which affect the inhabitants of some
particular districts only. The common law is an example of general
custom, as is public international law.
Consuetudo.
Latin. Custom; usgage; practice.
Consuetudo est altera lex.
Custom is another law.
Consuetudo interpres legum.
Custom is the expounder of laws.
Consuetudo loci observanda.
The custom of the place is to be conformed to.
Damages
Damages
| Schadensersatz (in Geld) / Schäden
Pecuniary compensation or indemity which may be recovered in the courts by any person who has suffered loss detriment or injury.
A general term for the remedy of a tort. Normally limited to monetary damages on a theory of compensation for the injured interest (either as valued by tort feasor or victim), but may also rely on a theory of retribution, deterrence/prevention or emotional satisfaction. In its broadest sense damages can imply remedies other than monetary.
There are a variety of types of damages. The various terms and their meanings are discussed below:
Damages, Actual
| Konkreter Schaden | Indemnisation effective
Damages awarded for calculable material injury; Damages deemed to compensate the injured party for losses sustained as a direct result of the injury suffered
Damages, Civil / Constitutional tort
Injuries sustained either to one's rights as a citizen of a State and of the United States, or else to his rights as a member of a family. See: Bivens Claim
Damages, compensation for | Schadensersatz | dommages et intérêts | risarcimento dei danni
The compensation which the law will award for an injury done and thus a synonym for damages
Those damages imputed in law from an act of wrong to another person. Such damages are imputed, i.e. they may or may not be related to the actual damages.
Damage, Compensatory (opp. To punitive damages) | Ersatz eines eingetretenen (materillen oder immateriellen) Schadens Ausgleichsentschädigung ? | dommages-intérêts compensatoires / indemnité compensatrice | premio di compensazione
Compensatory damages are intended to remedy the actual damages caused by the party against whom they awarded. Thus compensatory damages are an award of money intended to be exactly equal to the injury of the victim and nothing more. Yet they may include the abstract compensation for pain and suffering. Nevertheless compensatory damages do not include punitive damages (q.v.) .
Damages, Consequential | Folgeschaden (aus Primärschaden)/ Indirekter Schaden | dommage consécutif / dommages secondaires / dommage indirect
Those damages which do not arise immadiately out of the plaintiff’s
tort but which nevertheless are caused by the tort.
See: mitigation of damages, pure economic loss
Damages, Direct | dommage direct
Those damages which arise initially or primarily as a result of plaintiff’s
tort.
See: Roanoke Hospital Ass'n v. Doyle & Russell, lnc., 215 Va. 796,
214 S.E.2d 155, 160.
Damage, Divisible | teilbarer Schaden (bei Nebentäterschaft)
At common law where two or more tortfeasors are together the wrongful
cause of plaintiffs injury, the plaintiff would have a cause of action
against either for the entire amount of his or her damages. A possible
reform which has not yet been broadly adopted would be to divide the damage
award against each defendant in proportion to their fault.
See, Gaves v. Cabi, 96-T-5506, 96-T-5537 and 97-T-0026, Court of Appeals,
Ohio 1997 Ohio App. Lexis 5570.
Damage, Emotional | Gefühlsschaden
See damages for pain and suffering
Damages, exemplary | Exemplarischer Schadensersatz | dommages-intérêts exemplaires | risarcimento danni
A synonym for punitive damages. Exemplary damages are those damages
arising out of the defendant's willful acts where such acts are ere malicious,
violent, oppressive, fraudulent, wanton or grossly reckless. The justification
of examplary damages is primarily punishment of the individual and deterrence
of other individuals but secondarily as a form of compensation. In some
cases of outrageous conduct, e.g. fraud, sexual abuse, or other intentional
torts, the exemplary damages can be much greater than the actual damages.
See, e.g.: Wilkes v. Wood (1763), 98 Eng. Rep. 489;
Molzof v. United States, 502 O.S. 301
BMW of North America v. Gore, 646 So.2d 619 (Ala 94) Reversed
1996 U.S. LEXIS 3390, *; 517 U.S. 559; 116 S. Ct. 1589; 134 L. Ed.
2d 809
Grimshaw v. Ford Motor Co., 119 Cal.App.3d 757; 1981 Cal.App. Lexis 1859; 174 Cal.Reptr. 348
Damages, General | Ersatz eines immateriallen Schadens | Courants danni generici
Those damages which ordinarily flow from the tortious conduct and thus need not be specifically pleaded as they are implicit in the plaintiffs complaint. Having proven the underlying act, the ordinary damages flowing therefrom are presumed, though such proof may be refuted at least in the case of libel. Though there is no necessary correspondance between general damages and primary injury and special damages and consequential damages that correspondance often occurs in fact. In fact prudence dictates that plaintiff’s plead all damages as special damages to avoid losing their substantive rights due to the procedural distinction between general and special damages.
See: Myers v. Stephens, 43 Cal.Rptr. 420, 433, 233 C.A.2d 104.
Damages intended to compensate plaintiffs for the lost pleasure resulting from the injury. As hedonic damages inflate compensation and compensate an abstraction they are not recognized in all jurisdictions.
Damages, Monetary | Vermögensschaden
Monetary or pecuniary damages are those damages to the fortune of the victim. As such damages are concrete and material they are more easily measured than abstract rights (e.g. future contingent streams of income such as from a patent) or subjective emotions (pain and suffering).
Damages, Measure of | base d'évaluation des dommages-intérêts
The method used to calculate the damages sustained by the injured party.
Damages, Mitigation of | Obligation de limiter les dommages
The victim of a tort-feasor, though a victim, nonethless has an affirmative duty to do their best to reduce the damages consequent to the tortious misconduct. That duty is known as the duty to mitigate damages. The victim must take advantage of any reasonable opportunity he may have had under the circumstances to reduce or minimize the loss or damage.
The culpability of the defendant is irrelevant to the plaintiff’s duty to mitigate the damages. Defendants may thus raise the failure of the plaintiff to mitigate the damages as an affirmative defense not to the finding of liability but to the determination of the extent of damages.
For example, plaintiff who due to injury loses her job must nonetheless seek a new one but will be compensated for any lost wages and probably also (depending on the facts of the case) for their reduced income if the new employment pays less than the old.
See, e.g.: Spier v. Barker, 323 N.E.2d 164 (1974);
Damages, Nominal | dommages-intérêts symboliques
A trivial sum awarded where only a breach of duty was shown with however no showing of damages or where the damages are minute. Such damages, generally of a small amount (e.g. one dollar) are a symbolic form of satisfaction and recognition of the abstract right of the plaintiff where no measurable loss arising from the injury is averred or proven.
Damages for pain, suffering, loss of companionship, and loss of consortium (love of spouse). Unlike concrete material economic losses, such as lost wages, medical bills, and damage to property such damages are abstract. Non-economic damages may be limited by statute.
See, e.g.: Hitaffer v. Argonne Co., Inc., 183 F.2d 811 (D.C.Cir. 1950),
cert. denied 340 U.S. 852, (1950);
Yates v. Foley, 247 So.2d 40 (Fla 1971); General Electric Co. v. Bush,
498 P.2d 366 (Nev. 1972);
Damages for pain and suffering | schmerzengeld
Injuries to the plaintiff’s sense of well being; The non material damages to a victim of a tort which are remedied with money under a theory of compensation
Pure motional damages, where allowed, are generally only allowed to
immediate relatives. However in cases where the defendant is in close proximity
to a violent accident and thus felt themselves in danger pure emotional
damages will be permitted. Further emotional damages for pain and suffering
in addition to and as a result of some substantive material damages will
also be allowed.
See also: intentional infliction of emotional distress, negligent infliction
of emotional distress.
Damage per se / actionable per se | Eine Rechtsgutsverletzung wird einem kompensationsfähigen Schaden gleichgesetzt
A damage per se is one wherein damages are presumed upon occurrence of the tort, e.g. in cases of libel where the libel concerns imputation of crime, a loathsome disease, the unchastity of a woman, or words affecting the plaintiffs trade, business or profession. However per se damages may be able to be refuted by the defendant who will then bear the burden of proof for his affirmative defense.
Damages which do not require proof as they are presumed as a matter
of law to result naturally and necessarily from a tortious act.
Damages,
punitive | dommages-intérêts punitifs
See also: exemplary damages (syn.)
Punitive damages are those damages awarded in case of willful, wanton, or malicious conduct. They may even be available in cases of reckless negligence if the damages are particularly severe or in cases of fraudulent acts. Punitive damages serve to punish the defendant and deter others. The plaintiff must prove both the necessity and extent of punitive damages according to the ordinary standard of a preponderance of the evidence. Conduct is malicious if it is accompanied by ill will, or spite, or if it is for the purpose of injuring another. Conduct is reckless if it reflects a complete indifference to the safety and rights of others.
See: Wetherbee v. United lns' Co. of America, 18 C.A.3d 266, 95 Cal.Rptr.
678, 680.
Damages, Special | Ersatz eines konkretes Vermögensschadens | dommages-intérêts spéciaux
Those damages which do not arise ordinarily out of the injury but which arise extraordinarily and thus must be specifically plead and proven. Such damages are nonetheless concrete and material as opposed to abstract. That is they are calculable in economic terms. Special damages must be plead and proven in cases of slander. E.g. a plaintiff’s has been burgled, and as a consequence must seek lodging elsewhere. This consequential damage, having to pay a hotelier, must be specially plead and proven.
Sometimes the special damage is said to constitute the substance of the action itself; for example, in an action wherein the plaintiff declares for slanderous words, which of themselves are not a sufficient ground or foundation for the suit, if any particular damage result to the plaintiff from the speaking of them, that damage is properly said to be the substance of the action.
Special damages can include medical bills, repair and replacement of property, lost wages and other concrete damages which are not abstract speculative or subjective.
See: Twin Coach Co. v. Chance Vought Aircraft Inc., 163 A.2d 278, 286.
Damages, Treble / Treble Costs | Strafschadensersatz
Treble damages is the measure for an award of punitive damages. The actual calculation of punitive damages is not fixed according to a formula and must in all cases be proven by the plaintiff, first as to existence, second as to extent. However those damages can be as high as three times the substantive damages plus the plaintiffs attorney’s fees and costs. Treble damages may also be governed by statute which may abrogate the common law rule.
E.g., if a jury awards twenty dollars damages and punitive damages would be forty dollars more. However the construction of treble damages is different from that of treble costs.
Treble costs are sometimes awarded by statutes. When an act awards treble
costs, the party is allowed three times the usual costs, excepting the
fees and costs of their attorney which are not trebled.
Damnum sine injuria
Literally condemnation without injury, often mis-translated as damages with no injury but in fact would be better translated as injury (a wrong) with no damages (a measure).
Refers to the legal situation in which plaintiff’s right is not respected
by another but where the breach of plaintiff’s right does not cause a damage,
or at least not a calculable or admissible damage. A finding of damnum
sine injuria can be the basis for a finding of nominal damages (q.v.).
Deceit | Arglistige Täuschung | Betrug
Deceit is a tort of fradulent misrepresentations: it’s elements are:
1) A fraudulent statement
2) Made with intent to decieve
3) Which induces reliance on the part of the plaintiff
4) And results in injury to the plaintiff.
The tort will also lie where the statement was made with reckless disregard
as to its truth or falsehood.
Deceit is similar to the tort of passing off; however in the tort of deceit the injured plaintiff is a consumer, and in the tort of passing off the injured plaintiff is a competitor.
In some jurisdiction deceit or fraud is a statutory tort and includes an action against false advertising.
See: Karlin v. IVF America, 1999 N.Y. LEXIS 815, *; 93 N.Y.2d 282; 712 N.E.2d 662; 690 N.Y.S.2d 495 (Suit for false advertising permitted under fraud statute in case of medical misrepresentation).
Defamation | Verleumdung / Üble Nachrede / Beleidigung
Communication to third parties of false statements about a person such that the statements injure the person’s reputation or dissuade others from associating with them.
There are two forms of defamation, slander, which is oral and libel which is written. In cases of slander, damages must be proven, but in cases of libel damages are not presumed and must be proven.
Truth is a defence to an accusation of defamation.
This tort corresponds, roughly, to the German torts of Verleumdung, üble Nachrede, and Beleidigung.
Beleidigung is a more extensive injury than defamation and includes words which are insulting or emotionally injurious.
At common law in England a court could order the defaming defendant to offer an apology.
See, e.g.
McGowen v. Prentice, La.App., 341 So.2d 55, 57.
Wolfson v. Kirk, Fla.App., 273 So.2d 774, 776.
Public figures, including officeholders and candidates, have to show that the defamation was made with malicious intent and was not just fair comment.
Defamation and the Constitution
In the U.S. the First Amendment freedoms of speech and press must also be considred. New York Times v. Sullivan, 376 U.S. 254, 264 (1964); Masson, 501 U.S. at 510. The U.S. constitution protects statements of opinion on matters of public concern that do not contain or imply a provable factual assertion. Milkovich, 497 U.S. at 20.
To determine whether a statement implies a factual assertion, courts examine the totality of the circumstances in which it was made. They look at the context and contents which the work present – the subject of the work and the setting in which the subject is treated. The court will look to the language for hyperbole or figurative language. They look to see whether the statement can be proven or disproven and whether it merely expresses an opinion.
'[T]he First Amendment requires that the courts allow latitude for interpretation.' Partington, 56 F.3d at 1154 (quoting Moldea v. New York Times Co., 22 F.3d 310, 315 (D.C.Cir.), cert. denied, 115 S.Ct. 202 (1994)).
A defense to defamation is that the supposedly defamatory statement
was in fact merely an expression of a personal subjective opinion. To determine
whether a statement is merely an opinion, the court puts itself in the
position of a reasonable person percieving the statement in the totality
of circumstances. "what constitutes a statement of fact in one context
may be treated as a statement of opinion in another, in light of the nature
and content of the communication taken as a whole." (Gregory v. McDonnell
Douglas Corp. (1976) 17 Cal.3d 596, 601.) Where the statement is
'cautiously phrased in terms of apparency,' it is less likely to be seen
as an assertion and more likely to be seen as an opinion. Other facts and
circumstances of the publication must also be considered. The statement
must also be seen as a whole: 'It may not be divided into segments and
each portion treated as a separate unit.' It must be read as a whole in
order to understand its signification. import and the effect which it was
calculated to have on the reader, and construed in the light of the whole
scope and apparent object of the writer, considering not only the actual
language used, but the sense and meaning which may have been fairly presumed
to have been conveyed to those who read it.
Default / Defect | Fehlverhalten / Fehler (?)
A flaw in a product which causes it to malfunction which malfunction may lead to a tort. See: products liability.
A defect is ordinarily a condition precedent to the finding of a tort under a theory of strict liability. However there are exceptions to the rule: in cases of negligent supply by a merchant of an inherently dangerous product to minor the manufacturor can also be held liable.
Where a product is defective the products manufacturer can be implicated in tort on a theory of strict liability.
A product is in a defective condition, i.e. is unreasonably dangerous to the user, when it has a propensity or tendency for causing physical harm beyond that which would be contemplated by the ordinary user.
A defective condition is a legal cause of injury if it directly produces the injury. A defective condition may be a legal cause of damage even though it operates in combination with the act of another, or some other natural cause.
Thus, in cases involving defective or unreasonably dangerous products the manufacturer may be liable even though it exercised all reasonable care in the design, manufacture and sale of the product in question.
Manufacturers are not on always liable for accidents resulting from misuse of their products. The manufacturer is not an insurer. The mere possibility that injury result from the use of a prodcut is insufficient to impute liability to a manufacturer. (Moomey v. Massey Ferguson, Inc., C.A.N.M., 429 F.2d 1184. 1184.) here is no duty upon the manufacturer to produce a product that is 'accident-proof.' However the manufacturer is required to make a product free of defective and unreasonably dangerous conditions.
See: Manieri v. Volkswagenwerk, A.G., 151 N.J.Super. 422, 376 A.2d 1317,
1322.
French défense: Latin defensa: defendere, to strike down or away, ward off, repel. Mid. Eng. defence.
That which is proposed by the defendant to defeat their opponents claim by denial of the injury, by justification of the cause of injury, or by reducing or eliminating the damages therefrom.
Defence | Einwendung / Rechtfertigung
Evidence offered by the accused to refute a charge.
A defence based not on the falsehood of the accusation but rather upon some excuse or justification (q.v.) which may limit the damages in whole or in part. Common affirmative defences include assumption of risk, incapacity, self defence and the statute of limitations among others. The defendant bears the burden of proof as to affirmative defences.
A defence made not on the merits but to obstruct and harrass the prosecution of the claim and which does not touch upon the substantive merits of the claim.
A defence founded not on a theory of law but on a theory equity or on both a theory of law and of equity. See: Equity
A defence in the common law which contests both the finding of damages, that the defendant was negligent, and the extent thereof, that if the defendant were negligent, that his damages would be not what the plaintiff claims but some other lower value.
A general denial of the material allegations of a claim.
A defence made on a theory of law as opposed to equity.
A defence which asserts that the plaintiff does not have or never had a cause of action.
The party against whom recovery is sought and thus s/he who defends. The party complained against. In criminal cases, the person accused of the crime. In civil matters, the person or organization that is being sued.
In equity actions the defendant is sometimes called the respondent. In practice this term has disapperead with the merger of law and equity. The term respondent is also, and much more commonly, used to designate the person responding to an appeal.
Delict/Tort | Delikt (~Haftung)
Latin: Torquere, To twist. French: Tort – Wrong
A private, i.e. civil and not criminal, wrong or injury other than an injury resulting out of a contractual obligation, for which the law will grant a remedy. See: prima facie tort. See: tort, prima facie tort
Deterrence | Abschreckung / Prävention
One of the theories upon which liability in tort is justified. The idea being simply that the liability in tort will deter and prevent negligent errors.
Discernment | Einsichtsfähigkeit
Being of such an age that the law will impose ordinary legal responsibility upon the person. Having attained the age of majority and suffering from no incapacitating infirmity. See: children, capacity.
Ordinarily a tort will imply a remedy – ‘for every right there is a remedy’. However a plaintiff may have waived their right, either expressly or implicitly. Where that waiver was knowing, (i.e. appreciating the risks and dangers) intelligent and voluntary (absence of coercion) that plaintiff will not be able to recover for they have accepted the risk and thus the damage.
To avoid tort liability manufacturors and merchants will often include disclaimer clauses in their sales contracts. However these clauses may – or may not – be declared void as against public policy.
Discrimination | Diskriminierung
The effect of a statute which arbitrarily affords certain privileges to one class of persons yet denying them to another class of persons where no reasonable distinction can be made between the two classes. Unfair treatment or denial of rights or privileges to persons because of their race, age, nationality or religious heritage or convictions.
Baker v. California Land Title Co., O.C.Cal., 349 F.Supp. 235, 238, 239.
Division of the burden of proof | Beweislastverteilung
In some cases the burden of proof of certain elements of the claim will be on one party, while other elements of the same claim will be on the other. For example, in cases of libel, the plaintiff must prove the defamatory assertion after which damages are presumed. The defendant however can move to prove the truth of the matter asserted - but will bear the burden of proving the truth of the libelous statement.
The care that an ordinarily reasonable and prudent person would use under the same or similar circumstances. Proving the failure to exercise due care toward a person who one has a legal duty resulting in injury to that person establishes a prima facie tort. Due care is one of the standards of care (q.v.) in tort.
Physicians are held to a higher standard of care, not that of a reasonably prudent person but of a reasonably prudent physician.
Gillette v. Tucker, 67 Ohio St. 106, 65 N.E.
865.
Bruni v. Tatsumi, 46 Ohio St.2d 127, 129, 346 N E.2d 673, 676
doctors
Overwhelming force which compels a defendant to act or fail to act to the injury of another. Though that act or ommission would normally constitute a tort, here it may not if the defendant can prove that their conduct was justified because of duress.
Hyde v. Lewis, 25 lll.ApP.3d 495, 323 N.E.2d 533, 537.
Williams v. Rentz Banking Co., 112 Ga.App. 384, 145 S.E.2d 256, 258.
Legal or moral obligation. When recognised as a legal obligation the precondition for all torts.
Rasmussen v. Prudential lns. Co., 277 Minn. 266, 152 N,W.2d 359, 362.
Duty of Care | Verkehrspflicht („Sorgfaltspflicht“)
The duty of the defendant to act as a reasonably prudent person. This duty may be elevated to one of utmost care in certain situations such as bailors
Duty to act | Pflicht zu Handeln
Ordinarily the common law, unlike continental civil law, does not impose an affirmative duty to act. However the exceptions to the general rule of “no duty” are numerous: For example family members, working colleagues and contracting parties will all have a legal duty in tort to act non-negligently toward each other.
Duty to ensure safe premises | Verkehrssicherungspflicht
An owner of real property is under a duty to warn invitees of hidden dangers on his or her property.
Duty, Organisational | Organisationspflicht
The liability of a corporation is the same as that of a natural person.
However the corporation’s shareholders – unlike its board of director’s
and employees – will only be liable for the torts of the corporation to
the extent of their investment. Like any employer a corporation can be
held liable for torts to it’s employees which occur at the workplace according
to the vicarious liability imposed by the principle of respondeat superior
(q.v.).
The ordinary care which one is obliged to use towards others to protect against risk of injury. The care attention and watchfulness which a reasonable person would exercise under the circumstances in which he or she finds herself. Failure to meet this standard constitutes one element of a prima facie tort, namely breach of legal duty. The standard of care may be higher than ordinary due care so the terms are not exactly synonymous. Due care is the ordinary standard of care.
The general rule is that the standard of care is that of a reasonably
prudent person. Exceptionally higher or lower standards of care can be
imposed.
Murray v. De Luxe Motor Stages of lllinois, Mo.App., 133 S.W.2d 1074,
1078.
Anglo-French deuté indebtedness, obligation, from deu owing, due.
An obligation, whether imposed by law or assumed by contract to conduct oneself according to a certain standard such as the standard of ordinary care. For example landowners have a duty to maintain safe premises, drivers have a duty to drive responsably. Proving the existence of a duty is one element of a prima facie tort. (proving its breach, causation in fact, and legal causation are the others).
The general rule at common law is that persons are generally not subject to legal duty. This is not the case in civil law jurisdictions. There are many exceptions to the general rule in the common law.Family relations and co-workers owe a duty to each other. Duty can be assumed by one’s actions. Thus though one has no duty to aid a stranger once aid is offered to them that aid must be non-negligent.
Literally, to break.
The term used to designate the failure to comply with one’s legal duty, for example in tort the legal duty to act non-negligently. Breach of an existing legal duty is one element of a prima facie tort (q.v.).
A synonym for proximate cause. Hillis v. Home Owners' Loan Corporation, 348 Mo. 601
That cause which vhich Produces results which would not have come to
pass except for its interposition, and tor which, therefore, the person
who set in motion the owgina chain of causes is not responsible.
Southland Greyhound Lines v. Cotten, Tex.Civ.App., 55 S.W.2d 1066,
1069
See also: intervening / superseding cause.
At common law – unlike the continental civil law - there is no duty to rescue persons in an emergency. The only justification for that rationale is the fact that some persons may not in an emergency have the calm required to perform a rescue.
Statutes in some common law jurisdictions impose an affirmative duty to rescue or perform medical treatment on physicians and other persons employed as professional rescuers.
State v. Perry, 29 Ohio App.2d 33, 278 N.E.2d 50, 53.
Eminent domain is the right of the soveriegn over all property within its territorium. It is the right of the soveriegn to confiscate without compensation. Constitutional limitations on this sovereign power may exist and do exist in the United States where property when taken by the government must be fairly compensated and may only be taken for public use.
Authority of Cherokee Nation of Oklahoma v. Langley, 555 P.2d 1025, 1028.
Emotional Distress | Gefühlsschaden
Damages for emotional distress were greeted with skepticism at common law, all the more so where no claim of material injury was averred. Still one could consider assault an example where even the common law would permit recovery for intentional infliction of emotional distress. And later the common law did recognize exactly this tort: an intentional, i.e. willfull, action undertaken to cause emotional distress can be a cause of action in tort. More dubious however is the claim of a tort for negligent infliction of emotional distress. Such claims have been recognized by some jurisdictions but only very recently and not without skepticism and criticism. See: Negligent infliction of emotional distress, intentional infliction of emotional distress.
Employee vs. Independent Contractor
To determine whether a person is an employee or a contractor a number of factors must be considered in their totality: none of the factors are dispositive alone but taken together with the others will lead to the determination of the status of the person. A designation of the relationship by the parties without the underlying relation is not controlling.
One of the most important considerations is the degree of control exercised by the company over the work of the workers. Another factor to be considered is the duration of the relationship: independent contractors are seasonal whereas employees are generally employed indefinitely at will. An independent contract will tend to be paid not by the hour but by the job as a flat rate or on commission.
Persons injured by the negligence of an independent contractor will not be able to recover against the person who bid the services of that contractor unless there was negligence as to the hiring of the contractor. In contrast victims of ordinary employees may have a recovery either against the employer or the employee who will be jointly and severally liable under a theory of respondeat superior. See: respondeat superior, vicarious liability, organizational liability.
Riverbend Country Club v. Patterson, Tex. Civ. App., 399 SW.2d 382, 383 (1965)
Hammes v. Suk, 291 Minn. 233, 190 N.W.2d 478, 480, 481.
Sparks v. L. D. Folsom Co., 217 Cal.App.2d 279, 31 Cal.Rptr. 640,
Housewright v. Pacific Far East Line, Inc. (1964) 229 Cal. App. 2d 259,
40
Cal.Rptr. 208, 212;
Dowling v Mutual Life Ins. Co. of New York, 168 So.2d 107, 112 (La.App.1964).
Liability of a business either for the on-the-job injuries of its employees or for the collective liability of an entire industrial sector where it is clear that that sector had produced a defective product but where the specific manufacturer cannot be identified. See mass tort, market share liability (q.v.).
The hiring of a person for compensation. Whether an act occurred “within the scope of employment” will determine the liability of the employer for the torts of the employee toward third parties.
Hinton v. Columbia River Packers' Ass'n, C.C.A.Or., 117 F.2d 310. 117
Employment for so long or so brief as the employer chooses. This is the usual form of employment in the United States. At will employees may be fired at any time for any reason or no reason at all.
The study of medicine and probabilities in order to determine the causation of illness and the application of these two sciences to the proof of facts in a court of law. Epedemiological proofs are most often used in cases of toxic torts (q.v.) and mass torts (q.v.).
Latin aequitat- aequitas fairness, justice, from aequus equal, fair
Equity can refer to an interest in a property not equivalent to the value of the property. This meaning is not our concern here but is mentioned in order to prevent further confusion in an already dense and obscure area of the common law.
Historically speaking the equity courts assured the function of justice as fairness and corrected the mechanical legalistic application of rules of the law courts.
The courts of equity arose in England from a need to provide relief for claims that did not conform to the writ system existing in the courts of law. Originally, the courts of equity exercised great discretion in fashioning remedies. Over time, they established precedents, rules, and doctrines of their own that were distinct from those used in the courts of law.
The courts of equity were instituted by the King, then through his Chancellor to correct the harsh legalism of the law courts. As a special and discretionary correction instance the equity courts imposed moral restrictions upon the plaintiffs and also limited the remedies they would award. While some remedies would only be available at law, others would only be available at equity (namely injunction and specific performance). Thus a procedural legalism developed regqrding legal or equitable jurisdiction. This legalism however recreated the very problem the equity courts were intended originally to correct! This situation has been remedied somewhat by the fusion of law and equity courts into one general court of first instance both in the U.S. and the U.K. – though the procedural distinctions continue to survive.
Gilles v. Department of Human Resources Development, 11 Cal.3d 313, 521 P.2d 110.
Those objects or statements which tend to prove or disprove the elements of a claim. The things presented in court for the purpose of proof of matters there asserted.
Taylor v. Howard, lll R.I. 527, 304 A.2d 891, 893.
Testimony, documents, photographs, maps and video tapes are all examples
of evidence.
Evidence, Clear
and Convincing | hohe Wahrscheinlichkeit
See supra clear and convincing evidence
Beyond reasonable doubt | mit an sicherheit grenzende Wahrscheinlichkeit
A standard of proof in the common law.
State v. Dubina, 318 A.2d 95, 97.
Preponderance of | Überwiegende Wahrscheinlichkeit
See: Proof by a preponderance of the evidence infra
Presentation of evidence | Beweisaufnahme
See Presentation of evidence infra
Presentation of evidence | Beweisaufnahme
Evaluation of evidence | Beweiswürdigung
The determination of the trier of fact as to whether the movant has carried their burden of proof, i.e. whether the means of proof meet or exceed the standard of proof.
A reason alleged for the doing or not doing a thing. An excuse can reduce damages partially or entirely. Excuses are either because the tort feasor had no choice or because they had no intention to commit the act or its consequences. Minor children, lunatics, and the infirm may be excused due to their lack of discernment. Self defence and destruction of a good to prevent a greater evil is an excuse because the defendant had no choice.
Expectation damages | Erfüllungsinteresse
Those damages which a plaintiff sustains not based on the injury but because of the loss of some future, possibly speculative, stream of income. Courts will be hostile to expectation damages because of their speculative character.
Extent of Liability | Haftungsausfüllung
The principle that, once a foundation of liability has been determined, that that liability must be discharged; also the methods by which that liability is discharged
Fault | (zivilrechtliches) Verschulden
The entire system of negligent torts, with the exception of strict liability, is predicated on the notion of some fault, i.e. the absence of the care of a reasonably prudent person. Fault can be defined as negligence or the failure to perform a legal duty.
l Continental Ins. Co. v. Sabine Towing Co., C.C.A.Tex., 117 F.2d 694,
697.
Kersey Mfg. Co. v. Rozic, 207 Pa.Super, 182, 215 A.2d 323, 325.
Fault, Comparative | Mitverschulden
See negligence, comparative (syn.)
Fualt, Contributory | Mitverschulden
See negligence contributory
The United States, like many other former British colonies, is a federal system predicated upon the dual sovereignty of the states/provinces on the one hand, and on the national soveriegn at another. Germany is also a federal system, however the German federal government has broader powers than that of the United States
Fellow servant rule | Nicht Haftung des Arbeitgebers, wenn ein Arbeiter schuldhaft einen anderen Verletzt
At common law an employer would not be held liable for torts injuring an employee which occurred on the premises of the work-place but which were the fault of one of his servants. Prior to the industrial revolution, where there were both fewer and less serious accidents and where there was less mobility the fellow servant rule made sense. But with the reality of grave injury and highly mobile employees the necessity of providing at least de facto insurance for workers led to the abandonment of this rule and a determination of a general liability for an employer for all torts occurring at the work-place in the scope of the employees duties. This general liability is known as the principle of “respondeat superior”.
Walsh v. Eubanks, 183 Ark. 34, 34 S.W.2d 762, 764.
Southern Ry. Co, v. Taylor, 57 App.D.C. 21, 16 F.2d 517, 519.
Foreseebility | Vorhersehbarkeit
The modern determination of a negligent tort is dependant upon the foreseeability of the tort arising from the defendants conduct. That is, whether a reasonably prudent person would be able to foresee that their conduct would result in damage to the plaintiff.
Emery v. Thompson, 347 Mo. 494, 148 S.W.2d 479, 480.
Clark v. Wagoner, Tex., 452 S.W.2d 437, 439.
Wyatt v. Motsenbocker, Tex.Civ.App., 360 S.W.2d 543, 546.
Foundation of liability / basis of liability | Haftungsgrund
The principle that a tort must first be grounded in some factual instance. This principle of German law has no exact conceptual equivalent in the theory of common law torts though of course in practice analogues and paralells can be found.
General Contract Terms | Allgemeine Geschäftsbedingungen
Those clauses of a contract which are not negotiated. These clauses, often in fine print, may or may not be read and may or may not be comprehended or comprehensible. Thus courts may, at their discretion, set them aside if manifest injustice results under a theory of unconscionability. German law appears however to take these clauses much more seriously, both to the benefit of the consumer and to society at large through greater legal certainty. [?]
The principle of the common law is that “the king can do no wrong” – that is that there be no remedy against the sovereign because of sovereign immunity unless the sovereign waive that immunity. This principle continues to exist in America however the government consents to be sued according to the federal tort claims act.
Local governments can be sued directly under 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983
Monell v. Department of Social Services of N. Y., 429 U.S. 1071, 97 S.Ct. 807, 50 L.Ed.2d 789.
See: Sovereign Immunity (syn)
Principe Compania Naviera, S.A. v. Board of Com'rs of Port of New Orleans,
D.C.La., 333 F.Supp. 353, 355.
Governmental Liability | Staatshaftung
The liability of the government in tort was limited at common law by government immunit (also known as soveriegn immunity) (q.v.). This has changed with the introduction of tort-claim statutes, both by federal and state governments.
The moral right of a person to be held in good esteem by the community until their comportment prooves that they are in fact otherwise.
Hospital Liability | Krankenhausträgerhaftung
Hospitals may be immune from torts either as charities, when run by the private sector, under the principle of charitable immunity or, when run by the state, under a theory of governmental immunity. This immunity however would not exculpate the negligence of the hospital’s employees.
See governmental Immunity
See: employee vs. independent contractor
See: consent, informed
Industrialisation led to serious work-place accidents. Consequently to avoid the worst injustices governments enacted mandatory insurance systems to cover workers against such accidents. The tort system also plays an insurance role, but is generally not as efficient due to the costs of attorneys as an insurance system.
First party | Schadensversicherung
Insurance by a person of their person or property. Such insurance could arguably be considered as deductible from whatever damages award that the insured receives in the event of being victim of a tort-feasor. In cases of obligatory insurance a good argument can be made that reducing the damages award by the insurance is just, particularly in cases of no-fault liability such as auto accidents. However in cases of voluntary assurance the collateral source rule would be perverse: it would undermine the deterrence function of tort law by permitti