Search Results

In order to understand and justify the law of torts it is necessary to understand its place on the map of private law. The law of torts is not a free-standing subject. Torts belong in the same sequence as breach of contract and equitable wrongs. Torts is a catch all category of ‘other wrongs’. The law of torts has no free-standing existence independent of the primary rights, such as property rights, upon which it depends. Within the law of torts the picture is one of chaos. Torts are classified according to context (e.g., occupiers, products), degree of fault (e.g., negligence) and right infringed (e.g., defamation). The economic torts have no inherent unity. No subject can be understood in the way presented in the standard texts. Classification according to primary right is to be preferred, and the so-called ‘tort of negligence’ should be abandoned.

For reasons of public policy, most civil actions are subject to a time bar whose effect is that, once a particular period of time has passed, the defendant can no longer be sued on that particular action. There are two distinct legal regimes relating to the barring of restitutionary actions by the passage of time. The first and most important regime is contained in the Limitation Act 1980, which specifies particular limitation periods for different types of actions. The second regime is the equitable defence of laches, which determines whether an equitable action is time barred by reference to the justice of the case having regard to all the surrounding circumstances. This chapter discusses reversal of the defendant's unjust enrichment, qualification of the general limitation period for particular restitutionary claims, restitutionary claims founded on the commission of tort or breach of contract, restitutionary claims founded on equitable wrongs, vindication of proprietary rights, and function of the laches defence.

The concept of a remedy has rarely been subjected to rigorous analysis. Views may differ as to precisely what one is talking about. In this book, a remedy is used to denote the relief that a person can seek from a court. The focus is therefore entirely on judicial remedies; and not on what are sometimes termed ‘self-help’ remedies, which are available without coming to court, such as out of court settlements, termination of a contract, and the ejection of trespassers. Put another way, this book examines what a person can obtain from a court to counter an infringement (or threatened infringement) of his or her rights by a tort or breach of contract (or, in chapter 26, by an equitable wrong); but it is not concerned with any other legally permissible options open to a person to counter such an infringement.