Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 1K views

    Torts-Damnum Sine Injuria

    Uploaded by

    rmbj94_scribd
    The maxim "damnum sine injuria" means that there can be damage without a legal injury. An act that causes damage is not actionable in tort law if it does not infringe on any legal rights. For a plaintiff to succeed in a lawsuit, they must prove they suffered a legal injury - damage alone without an injury is not enough. Some acts that cause harm are not considered wrongful in the eyes of the law and therefore do not give the harmed person a right to legal action.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Torts-Damnum Sine Injuria

    Uploaded by

    rmbj94_scribd
    1K views3 pages
    The maxim "damnum sine injuria" means that there can be damage without a legal injury. An act that causes damage is not actionable in tort law if it does not infringe on any legal rights. For a plaintiff to succeed in a lawsuit, they must prove they suffered a legal injury - damage alone without an injury is not enough. Some acts that cause harm are not considered wrongful in the eyes of the law and therefore do not give the harmed person a right to legal action.

    Original Description:

    damnum sine injuria

    Original Title

    torts-damnum sine injuria

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The maxim "damnum sine injuria" means that there can be damage without a legal injury. An act that causes damage is not actionable in tort law if it does not infringe on any legal rights. For a plaintiff to succeed in a lawsuit, they must prove they suffered a legal injury - damage alone without an injury is not enough. Some acts that cause harm are not considered wrongful in the eyes of the law and therefore do not give the harmed person a right to legal action.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    1K views3 pages

    Torts-Damnum Sine Injuria

    Uploaded by

    rmbj94_scribd
    The maxim "damnum sine injuria" means that there can be damage without a legal injury. An act that causes damage is not actionable in tort law if it does not infringe on any legal rights. For a plaintiff to succeed in a lawsuit, they must prove they suffered a legal injury - damage alone without an injury is not enough. Some acts that cause harm are not considered wrongful in the eyes of the law and therefore do not give the harmed person a right to legal action.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 3

    The maxim damnum sine injuria literally means that there

    is an act which caused damage but no legal right is infringed


    . Such an act is not actionable in the law of Torts.

    The word damnum means damage . This damage may be
    loss of health , loss of service , physical hurt and loss of
    money or the like . The word injuria means a legal injury or
    tortuous act or an infringement of legal right . And the word
    sine means without . So the maxim means that a damage
    without infringement of any legal right . Where there is no
    infringement of legal right , whatever loss one may sustain ,
    no action lies against that act which is not at all a wrongful .
    Therefore , damnum sine injuria does not afford any right
    to sue for legal remedy including claim of compensation and
    etc.

    I n order to make a person liable in law , the plaintiff must
    prove that he sustained legal injury . Damage without injury
    is not actionable . There are many acts which are , though
    harmful , are not wrongful , in the eye of law , and therefore ,
    do not give rise to a right of action in favour of the person
    who sustains the damage .

    An example may be given with respect to this maxim .

    In the famous case of Gloucester Grammar School , the
    defendant , a schoolmaster , set up a rival school next to that
    of the plaintiff , with the result that the boys from the
    plaintiffs school flocked to the defendants . The plaintiff
    sued the defendant for the loss . It was held that no suit
    could lie , because bonafide competition can afford no
    ground of action , whatever damage it may cause .


    The general principle upon which the maxim is based is that
    if one exercises his common or ordinary rights , within
    reasonable limits , and without infringing others legal right ,
    such exercise of rights does not give rise to an action in tort
    in favour of that other person .

    In another famous case of Day Vs. Browning , where the
    plaintiffs house was called Ashford Lodge for sixty years
    , and the adjoining house belonging to the defendant was
    called Ashford Villa for forty years . The defendant then
    altered the name of his house and started to call it Ashford
    Lodge . The plaintiff alleged that this act of defendant had
    caused him great inconvenience and annoyance , and had
    materially diminished the value of property . It was held that
    the defendant was not liable , as he had not violated any
    legal right of the plaintiff .

    The Privy Council pointed out in the case of Roger Vs.
    Rajendra Dutta, that it is essential to an action in tort that the
    act complained of , should under the circumstances , be
    legally wrongful as regards the party complaining . That is ,
    it must prejudicially affect him in some legal righ

    You might also like