Rules For Intentional Torts Compared To Rules For Negligence

In the case of an intentional tort, the plaintiff has been harmed by an intentional act. In an instance of negligence, the plaintiff has been harmed by careless and neglectful act.

Features of a negligence-based tort

Defendant breached his or her duty in an unreasonable and irresponsible manner, and thus injured plaintiff.

Possible defenses against such a charge
-Plaintiff guilty of conditional or contributory negligence
-Plaintiff delayed seeing a doctor; did not mitigate the injury’s effects

Features of intentional tort

Defendant intended harm to the plaintiff, or to the plaintiff’s property.

Possible defenses against such a charge
-Defendant had been engaged in act of self-defense
-Plaintiff’s request had triggered the defendant’s actions

How the legal system deals with the 2 types of torts?

A charge of that a defendant has committed a negligence tort does not rule out the possible charge of an intentional tort. Those 2 charges could be made by the same plaintiff and against the same defendant.

If some driver was to become distracted while using a cell phone, and cause a terrible accident, one that injured a young driver, the driver’s parents might consider seeking money for a negligence-based tort, and also for suing the driver for an intentional tort. A driver’s readiness to use a cell phone, while sitting behind a steering wheel could be viewed as unacceptable and dangerous behavior.

For that reason, the fact that the driver’s car hit the young adult’s car might be viewed as the result of an intentional act. In other words, the absence of concern for others could be viewed as a willingness to harm others.

Of course, the parents would not know for sure whether or not a jury would rule in their favor, if they filed a lawsuit that was based on an intentional tort. Consequently, the same parents might decide to file a lawsuit to file a lawsuit that was based on negligence as well.

The legal system would allow the parents to proceed with such plans. It would not claim that the parents would be trying to charge the defendant twice for the same crime. A negligence tort and an intentional tort are 2 different crimes, as per the Personal Injury Lawyer in Mississauga.

That approach might reduce the chances for the court to hit the defendant with punitive damages. Plaintiffs often want to avoid the imposition of punitive damages, because the government can tax those court-granted funds.

By the same token, the parents would be able to seek a long list of damages. The legal system does not put a limit on the number of economic damages that a plaintiff can seek during a personal injury case, including one that has resulted from commission of a negligence tort.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *