LectureLoading…

Conditions of liability: injuria sine damno, damnum sine injuria, ubi jus ibi remedium; remoteness of damage; res ipsa loquitur and other maxims

LUG-101 Law of Torts including Motor Vehicle Accident and Consumer Protection Act, Unit I: Conditions of liability including damnum sine injuria, injuria sine damno; remoteness of damages. Maxims: ubi jus ibi remedium, res ipsa loquitur, volenti non fit injuria, etc. · LLB · 60 min

The maxims that decide whether harm is actionable - injuria sine damno (Ashby v. White, Marzetti, Bhim Singh) and damnum sine injuria (Gloucester Grammar School, Mogul Steamship, Bradford v. Pickles, Chasemore v. Richards, Town Area Committee v. Prabhu Dayal) - and ubi jus ibi remedium with its limits; remoteness of damage: the directness test (Re Polemis), the foreseeability test (The Wagon Mound), Scott v. Shepherd, Hughes v. Lord Advocate, the thin-skull rule (Smith v. Leech Brain) and novus actus interveniens; res ipsa loquitur as a rule of evidence (Byrne v. Boadle, Scott v. London and St Katherine Docks, MCD v. Subhagwanti); and the other maxims, including a first look at volenti non fit injuria. It answers fourteen past parts from 2017-18 to 2025-26.

Objectives

Slides

  1. Damnum and injuria: the two ideas behind the maxims
  2. Injuria sine damno: injury without damage
  3. Damnum sine injuria: damage without injury
  4. The two maxims compared
  5. Ubi jus ibi remedium: where there is a right there is a remedy
  6. Remoteness of damage (1): causation and the directness test
  7. Remoteness of damage (2): the foreseeability test and its refinements
  8. Novus actus interveniens: the chain of causation
  9. Res ipsa loquitur: the thing speaks for itself
  10. Res ipsa loquitur in India
  11. Other maxims of the law of torts (volenti non fit injuria and the rest)

Loading the lecture…