Law of torts Nuisance and Negligence notes – CSEET
Law of torts Nuisance and Negligence:
ICSI CSEET: The Council of the ICSI has released a notice regarding CSEET on the day of the inauguration of ICSI Golden Jubilee Celebrations on 4th Oct 2017.
The Gazette Notification on the Company Secretaries (Amendment) Regulations, 2020 has been published on 3rd February 2020 in the Official Gazette of India and the same shall be applicable from the said date of publication.
Now ICSI Published a notice regarding CSEET Test which going to start from 2020 May.
We are now going to discuss the details of CSEET Paper-2 Legal Aptitude and Logical Reasoning – Law of torts Nuisance and Negligence notes.
Law of torts Nuisance and Negligence
Nuisance is a form of lesser interference with land.It may be private or public, and private nuisance has come to cover the conduct of the defendants which affects the claimant’s interest in the land. This could be done by:
- Affecting materially his land.
- Affecting his use or enjoyment of it.
- Interfering with servitudes and similar rights over the land.
While private nuisance is always actionable, public nuisance is not. A claimant of public nuisance has to establish special loss over and above the inconvenience suffered by the public in general,as public nuisance is a crime and it would be unreasonable for everyone inconvenienced by it to be allowed to claim. This distinction was followed in India, along with the UK principles of nuisance
Abatement of Nuisance:
The occupier of land may lawfully abate (i.e. terminate by his own act), any nuisance injuriously affecting it. Thus, he may cut overhanging branches as spreading roots from his neighbor’s trees, but
(i) upon giving notice;
(ii) by choosing the least mischievous method;
(iii) avoiding unnecessary damage.
In regard to negligence, Indian jurisprudence have approved the approach stated in Ratanlal & Dhirajlal: The Law of Torts, laying down three elements:
- A legal duty to exercise “ordinary care and skill”.
- The breach of [the] duty caused by the omission to do something which a reasonable man, guided by those considerations which ordinarily regulate the conduct of human affairs would do, or doing something which a prudent and reasonable man would not do.
- Resulting in injury to the plaintiff’s person or property.
The Indian approach to professional negligence requires that any skilled task requires a skilled professional. Such a professional would be expected to be exercising his skill with reasonable competence.
Professionals may be held liable for negligence on one of two findings:
- He was not possessed of the requisite skill which he professed to have possessed.
- He did not exercise, with reasonable competence in the given case, the skill which he did possess.
The standard to be applied for judging negligence would be that of an ordinary competent person exercising ordinary skill in that profession. It is not necessary for every professional to possess the highest level of expertise in that branch which he practices.Professional opinion is generally accepted, but courts may rule otherwise if they feel that the opinion is “not reasonable or responsible”.
Indian Courts recognize the concept of contributory negligence. Contributory negligence means the failure by a person to use reasonable care for the safety of either of himself or his property, so that he becomes blameworthy in part as an “author of his own wrong”.
In the absence of reasonable care on the part of the claimant, courts are likely to reduce the liability of the injurer. “The rule of negligence with the defense of contributory negligence holds an injurer liable if and only if he was negligent and the victim was not. In India, this rule requires proportional sharing of liability when both parties were negligent. That is, the compensation that the victim receives gets reduced in proportion to his or her negligence