LLB Examination Civil Law: Property, Torts and Equity Syllabus

Civil Law: Property, Torts and Equity syllabus — full chapter and topic list

Expand any chapter to see its topics and sub-topics. This is the whole examinable outline for Civil Law: Property, Torts and Equity in LLB Examination, not a summary of it.

1. 1

   Law of Torts: General Principles

   4 topics

   • Nature and Definition of Tort
   • Damnum Sine Injuria and Injuria Sine Damno
   • General Defences
   • Vicarious Liability
2. 2

   Specific Torts

   5 topics

   • Negligence
   • Nuisance
   • Defamation
   • Trespass
   • Strict and Absolute Liability
3. 3

   Transfer of Property: General Principles

   4 topics

   • Movable and Immovable Property
   • Transfer of Property by Act of Parties
   • Doctrine of Part Performance
   • Rule Against Perpetuity
4. 4

   Specific Transfers of Property

   5 topics

   • Sale of Immovable Property
   • Mortgage and Charge
   • Lease
   • Gift
   • Exchange and Actionable Claims
5. 5

   Principles and Maxims of Equity

   3 topics

   • Nature and Development of Equity
   • Maxims of Equity
   • Equitable Doctrines
6. 6

   Trusts

   3 topics

   • Creation of Trusts
   • Duties and Liabilities of Trustees
   • Rights and Powers of Trustees
7. 7

   Specific Relief

   5 topics

   • Recovery of Possession
   • Specific Performance of Contracts
   • Rectification and Cancellation of Instruments
   • Declaratory Decrees
   • Injunctions

Civil Law: Property, Torts and Equity flashcards for LLB Examination

22 of 52 cards from the Civil Law: Property, Torts and Equity deck — real questions with worked answers.

1. Define 'tort' and state the origin of the word.

   A tort is a civil wrong, independent of contract, for which the remedy is an action for unliquidated damages. The word 'tort' derives from the Latin 'tortum', meaning 'twisted' or 'wrong' (via the French for 'wrong').

2. What are the three essential constituents (essentials) of a tort?

   (1) A wrongful act or omission by the defendant; (2) the act must cause legal damage to the plaintiff (violation of a legal right); and (3) the wrong must be of a kind that gives rise to a legal remedy in the form of an action for unliquidated damages.

3. What is the difference between 'damages' and 'unliquidated damages' in tort?

   Damages is the monetary compensation awarded. 'Unliquidated' means the amount is not fixed or pre-agreed by the parties but is assessed by the court at its discretion — distinguishing tort from contract, where damages are often liquidated.

4. Distinguish a tort from a breach of contract.

   In tort, duties are fixed by law and owed to persons generally; damages are unliquidated. In contract, duties are fixed by the parties themselves and owed only to a specific party; consideration is required, and damages are usually liquidated or based on the parties' agreement.

5. Distinguish a tort from a crime.

   A tort is a private wrong; the injured party (plaintiff) sues for compensation. A crime is a public wrong against the State; the State prosecutes and the remedy is punishment. The same act (e.g. assault) may be both a tort and a crime.

6. State and translate the maxim 'Ubi jus ibi remedium'.

   'Ubi jus ibi remedium' means 'where there is a right, there is a remedy.' It expresses that whenever the law confers a legal right, it also provides a remedy for its violation.

7. What does the maxim 'Damnum sine injuria' mean?

   'Damnum sine injuria' means damage (actual loss) without the infringement of a legal right. Such damage is not actionable because no legal right of the plaintiff has been violated.

8. What does the maxim 'Injuria sine damno' mean?

   'Injuria sine damno' means the infringement of a legal right without any actual loss or damage. It is actionable per se — the plaintiff can sue even without proving harm, because a legal right has been violated.

9. Which case is the leading authority for 'Damnum sine injuria'?

   Gloucester Grammar School Case (1410). A rival schoolmaster set up a competing school causing the plaintiff financial loss, but as no legal right was violated, no action lay. (Mogul Steamship Co. v. McGregor is also cited.)

10. Which case is the leading authority for 'Injuria sine damno'?

    Ashby v. White (1703). A qualified voter was wrongfully prevented from voting; although his preferred candidate still won (no actual loss), his legal right was infringed, so the action succeeded.

11. In 'Injuria sine damno', is proof of actual damage required?

    No. Because a legal right has been violated, the tort is actionable per se. The court presumes damage, and the plaintiff need not prove any actual loss (e.g. trespass, libel).

12. What are 'general defences' in the law of torts?

    They are defences that a defendant may plead to escape liability across a range of torts, including: volenti non fit injuria (consent), plaintiff the wrongdoer, inevitable accident, act of God, private defence, necessity, mistake, statutory authority.

13. State and explain the defence 'Volenti non fit injuria'.

    'To one who consents, no injury is done.' Where the plaintiff voluntarily, with full knowledge of the risk, consents to the act, they cannot later sue for the resulting harm. Consent may be express or implied.

14. What two elements must be proved for the defence of 'volenti non fit injuria'?

    (1) The plaintiff had knowledge of the risk; and (2) the plaintiff, with such knowledge, voluntarily agreed to undertake or accept that risk (free and voluntary consent). Mere knowledge is not enough.

15. Explain the general defence of 'Act of God' (Vis Major).

    An Act of God is an extraordinary, unforeseeable natural event (e.g. earthquake, exceptional flood, lightning) occurring without human intervention that could not be guarded against by reasonable care. It excuses liability. Leading case: Nichols v. Marsland.

16. Explain the defence of 'Inevitable accident'.

    An inevitable accident is one that could not have been avoided despite the exercise of ordinary care, caution and skill by the defendant. The harm was neither intended nor foreseeable. Leading case: Stanley v. Powell.

17. Explain the defence of 'Necessity' in tort.

    Intentionally causing harm to prevent a greater harm or evil is justified under necessity (e.g. pulling down a house to stop a fire spreading). The act must be reasonable and done to avoid a greater danger.

18. Explain the defence of 'Private defence'.

    The law permits a person to use reasonable force to protect their own body or property (or that of others) from unlawful harm. The force used must be proportionate to the threat; excessive force destroys the defence.

19. Explain the defence of 'Statutory authority'.

    Where an act is authorised by statute, the harm necessarily resulting from it is not actionable, even if it would otherwise be a tort. Authority may be absolute (no liability even with care) or conditional (liability if done negligently).

20. Define 'vicarious liability'.

    Vicarious liability is the liability of one person for the wrongful (tortious) act of another, arising out of a special relationship between them — e.g. master for servant, principal for agent — even though the first person committed no wrong himself.

21. What relationships give rise to vicarious liability?

    Principally: (1) master and servant; (2) principal and agent; (3) partners in a firm (for each other's acts in the course of business). The master/principal answers for torts committed within the scope of employment/authority.

22. State the maxim 'Qui facit per alium facit per se'.

    'He who acts through another acts himself.' It is the basis of vicarious liability — the acts of the agent or servant, done within authority/employment, are treated in law as the acts of the principal or master.

See more Civil Law: Property, Torts and Equity flashcards →

Planning Civil Law: Property, Torts and Equity for LLB Examination

Civil Law: Property, Torts and Equity (LLB Examination) FAQ