Law:
How Rules Affect Us
Introduction
There are numerous laws in our society, different sets of rules and regulations that measure and govern relationships between people, their states and their environment in its totality. Laws are significant as they protect our privacy, properties, relationships, businesses, assets and economies. Some of these laws revolve around offering equal opportunities for all. Some are more concerned with contracts and others on torts just to mention some. All these cover a wide variety of issues that define our daily encounters, the contract law for instance places an emphasis on a wide range of agreements people make whether in businesses, or between clients and enterprises or amongst neighbors and within institutions.
This paper aims at analyzing a single law, the torts law, the problems it attempts to solve and to carefully evaluate how it affects the planet as a whole, the society, businesses and individual people.
The Torts Law
The Tort Law originates from the Latin word that means wrong doing. It emphasizes more on civil wrongs rather than a breach of contract and is more concerned on compensation rather than punishment. Torts are in most instances not crimes but may lead to criminal proceedings. In most of the cases, the plaintiff often seeks to be financially compensated for damages incurred by the defendant's wrongdoing. The main function of the torts law is to determine the evidence of the presence or lack of wrongdoing and to provide a remedy.
Torts are broadly classified into three: intentional torts (intentional wrongdoing), negligence (unreasonable conduct) and strict liability. Strict liability includes defective products, vicious animals and abnormally dangerous activities. There are different types of damages that fall in the scope of the tort law which include damage to property, interference with personal rights and privacy, damage to economic interests, personal injury, abnormally dangerous activities and interference of contract just to mention a few. Under the torts law, payment may include compensation for damages or injunctions that seek to prevent further damages rather than compensating for what has already occurred (Brans, 2001, p. 115).
There is a wide range of circumstances in which the tort law can be utilized to claim for damages which just to name a few are road traffic accidents, professional, malpractice, workplace injuries to violence and deliberate false statements.
The Tort law is, therefore, essentially a private law, horizontal in nature such that it occurs between private individuals. It however also becomes vertical when it becomes a public law that relates individual persons to the state. It is private in cases like the contract law that concerns the legal relationships between individuals.
Effect of the torts law to the Planet
It is important to note that that not all losses can be compensated for and that it only occurs where a wrong doing under the tort law has been committed. Such types of “pure case” scenarios are significantly applicable in the relationship of the tort law to the planet. The planet, our environment cannot communicate and put up a case in a court of law, therefore, when it is damaged and exploited at its peril it goes uncompensated.
In cases where the loss results from an accident where nobody is at fault, the loss often goes uncompensated. The question, therefore, goes to whether or not all the torts are covered in the law.
Such cases have become abundant in America where the tort law has encountered a considerable amount of vindictiveness and greed. In the American courts for instance torts are, usually, decided as well as assessed by the jury that is a right guaranteed by the seventh amendment of the constitution of the United States (Brans, 2001, p. 126). Predatory lawyers are therefore taking advantage of the ‘class action suits’ and the procedure whereby individual jury members are often individually challenged and consequently removed before a trial and hence ensuring that the one who is able to pay is the one who pays regardless of whose fault it is. Carriages of justice on how the planet is treated are becoming less frequent highlighting the fact that the American tort law is going wrong.
The law of torts was initially designed to transfer the cost of damage to the person who causes it. It follows the principles of accountability that are fundamental to the basic regulations of ordinary disputes. This, therefore, generally meant that those who cause the harm bear the cost of the burden, a negative feedback loop that guarantees a strong incentive to avoid tortious behavior.
The same is however not true for the American tort law, the basic feedback loop from the damage to the cause has been evidently damaged. The system is proceeding out of control and is going out of control amplifying the evil that is complained about where innocent parties are forced to pay for damages that is equally augmenting the costs to match the capacity to cover them. The Environmental Protection Agency should establish interception that will ensure that costs are met by governments, businesses and individuals who cause any form of damage.
Our planet is at a critical stage that is past the agrarian and industrial system. The earth is now experiencing rapid growth and development in the technology scene. The implications of all this upward trajectory in the information technology age is nothing but evident. Even before the IT age, however, during an industrialization, the destruction of the planet had already been activated. The extraction of minerals from the earth led to the discovery of coal that fueled the birth of industries. Coal was one of the very first precursors to environmental destruction. Not only is it being overexploited and depleted from the ground, but it is also a huge contributor to the high increase of carbon IV oxide gas in the atmosphere. This has led to a massive destruction of the functioning of the planet, causing global warming and climate change.
Such a kind of damage falls under the intentional torts whereby voluntary acts invade protected interest. Here the culprit is knowledgeable of the implications of his activities to the victim. There have however been environmental laws that seek to prevent continuous environmental unsustainable practices. However, if we are to assess whether or not there has been any compensation for all the destruction meted out to the earth, we will probably find a minimal percentage of less than 10% (Brans, 2001, p. 131).
On defenses to such cases of intentional torts, privilege and consent are often used which are unfair when applied to the case of environmental damage. Defendants according to the tort law are able to avoid liability by proving that the plaintiff either consented to the conduct of the defendant or that it was a privilege for the defendant to act as they did or it would have otherwise been an intentional tort. Whether a plaintiff in such a case has consented to the conduct of the defendant, it is often determined by the behavior of the plaintiff under the existent circumstances and not the actual feeling of the plaintiff. In such instances, consent can be expressed. This for example can be explained by a case whereby consent is sought from patients before they undergo medical treatment as well as consent from participants in a research and from employees who are engaging in a contract with their employers.
In the scenario of a consent being a privilege, it can be manifested in instances where someone acts in self-defense to avoid liability for any injuries. When attempting to create privileges, courts decide that the significance of the conduct can outweigh the risks of the harm imposed. Defendants can however lose their privilege when they act in bad faith.
On the tort of negligence, the planet still has a case to put up. The environment has been neglected by its inhabitants, and the effects are escalating by the day. The rate of deforestation has also increased immensely due to expansion of agricultural activities and human population. According to the law, damage results from careless conduct that is in most cases unintentional. It is only under certain circumstances that the injured is, usually, able to recover damages for the tort of negligence. Negligence, when carefully defined, is the unintentional conduct falling below the standard care necessary to protect others against exposure to unforeseeable injury and risk.
A plaintiff is expected to prove certain circumstances of the case to recover against defendants for the tort of negligence. This, for instance, can include the existence of a degree for exercising care the same way a prudent person would in the same circumstance. When there is a breach of that duty through a failure to adhere the reasonable standard conduct.
Effect of the tort to the Society
Another key function of the law of tort is found in the deterrence of future wrongdoing that especially affects the society. These judicial rulings according to their nature of wrongdoing define the society in its entirety concerning the limits of acceptable behavior. The deterrent effect of the law of tort is however difficult to measure. There are numerous factors that have a significant influence on whether the outcome of certain cases has a real and deterrent effect (Richard, 2007, p. 24). This can, for example, be explained on the terms of public awareness and willingness to modify its behavior. It is, therefore, evident that the tort places and exerts a huge amount of pressure on the society to conform to the laid down rules and regulations by the legislature. It is clear however that there are professional bodies like the Institute of Chartered Accountants, the Medical Council and the Law Society that have taken notice of such court decisions and were altering them accordingly.
Drivers on a highway are a good example of this type of pressure and stress to the general population. When drivers are on such public highways, are they expected to modify their driving to be safe for the utter fear of being sued by the law in civil courts rather than that of prosecution in the criminal courts? This is not the only applicable example in our society today. In the case of the tort of breach of duty, what is the view of the society on how both the plaintiff and the defendant can be exonerated? When a vehicle on the road is involved in a road accident as a result of a distraction from a business stand at the side of the road, which is to bear the burden for damages? Is it the driver for reckless driving or the business vendor for encroaching the land set aside for transport? The answer lies in both of the parties practicing a high level of good conduct that is more subjective than objective. This when realistically explained, has an element of perfection that is imposed to the public. As human beings, it is impossible to attain the level of perfection that is expected to be achieved by the law (Richard, 2007, p. 52). As a result, therefore, dictated by the law rather than the ingrained moral statutes on every individual that makes up the community.
What about justice, is the tort law just when it comes to societal governance? The perceived notion that justice and law go hand in hand has, unfortunately, grown overstated. Justice is frequently expected to yield to pragmatism in such a way that the legal system is administered effectively. This can often be observed in the case of criminal as well as criminal law. For example, a litigant may in some instances not be able to succeed in securing a through remedy even when a clear injustice has been done to him or her. In such kinds of unique scenarios, policies are applied and hence the need for ‘policy decisions'. It is these policies that play a role in denying litigant's remedies for purely cases of economic loss that do not involve negligent psychiatric injuries or misstatement. In such cases, there is an absence of proximity between the sufferer of the physical injury and that of the psychiatric injury (Richard, 2007, p. 53).
The detrimental effect of the tort law to the environment is exposed as highlighted, therefore, calling for a need to review the existent law to one that is more flexible and lenient to both parties in a case.
Effect of the tort to an Individual
The tort law is predominantly concerned with justice that is more corrective that punishing. It is a form of justice that seeks to rectify wrongs. This, therefore, involves the transfer of the harmful effect from the plaintiff to the defendant through the payment of money in damages. A case scenario as this has evident implications to an individual under the rule of the tort law. The tort law does not however allow for this kind of exchange to happen. Although individual people are bound to and have a right to be protected by the law, the judiciary feels it has the obligation of taking into account the interest of the public as well as the public policy such that the plaintiff cannot receive any sort of full remedy or any other remedy at all. This often occurs in relation to wrongs and failures that are committed by authorities in the public where courts may feel they are not obligated to care for any individual who suffers from such a kind of omission.
It becomes evident, therefore, that individuals are inadequately protected by the law. When there is a threat like this to the safety of the basic unit of a community then there is need for proactive action to make sure that the needs of every person is met and covered for in the law. The tort law is similarly concerned with distributive justice that related to the concept whereby the cost of harm is broadly distributed as wide as possible across the society.
This effect of the tort is such that the injured plaintiff is granted a remedy against a person who is other than the immediate wrongdoer in a position to offset all of the costs involved. This can in most instances occur after insurance funds have been set up (Robert, 1979, p. 7).
The degree of fault needed to establish liability varies from one tort to the other. In the negligence tort for instance, the standard is, usually, measured as a reasonable person would or would not have done in the circumstance. This is most instances an objective test on the social perspective of a people as in the case of some torts where mere carelessness is sufficient.
Effect of the tort to businesses
Torts are not always about the breach of contract whereby a civil lawsuit can be initiated. In the United States, there have been a number of people supporting the law in the country who have tried to merge the change of torts with issues like the push for medical professionals out of business to critical ones like the closing down of public parks.
There is a consensus that the current tort laws in the country places a lot of pressure on the economy. As a result, there has been a forceful push by even the former President George Bush for a change in the tort law. This it is believed will help improve economic growth especially through the creation of new jobs (Philip, 1994, p. 2). Although tort litigation is not going anywhere and is valuable in certain circumstances and cases, the current law forces liability insurance at extremely outrageous levels in different sectors. Although the push for a change in the torts is still nowhere near the horizon, the current law is observed to force viability insurance to high levels within many sectors.
Individuals have been affected by this unfair tort system when as a consequence we see wages and total earnings reducing and hence affecting the purchasing capacity and economic stability of a large percentage of citizens in the country. The profits of different corporate companies are being significantly affected. The production in industrial companies is similarly on a spiraling downward trajectory. Research and development have also not been left out in a growing list of the negative effects of the tort law (Philip, 1994, p. 3).
It is, therefore, evident that rising cost of putting up with the torts is having a dynamic effect to the society. Many are of the opinion that a change in the tort system will boost the current economic system although some others are still speculative of its real effects on the development of new jobs.
Business are affected in simple case scenarios when for instance a lady who has just bought hot coffee from McDonalds accidentally spills it on her lap and files for a claim from the shop for not warning her as provided. In such an instance, the business is bound to lose some of its profits and its net income from the court procedures.
Conclusion
Although the tort has some benefits like safe practices for unsafe products, respectful resolution and inappropriate practices, when the pros and cons are weighed against each other there is an evidence of serious concerns.
The aim of this paper was to bring to light some of the unfair ends of the laws that play a significant role in our lives and to analyze and evaluate their implications. Changing the law tort law is therefore being scrutinized to determine whether or not a change in the system might be able to boost not only the economy but also the society and individual governance while at the same time, still be able to protect cases of damage, injury or wrongful act.
References
Brans, E. H. P. (2001). Liability for damage to public natural resources: Standing, damage, and
damage assessment. The Hague: Kluwer Law International.
Philip K.H. (1994) The Death of Common Sense: How the Law is Suffocating America.
Apassim
Richard A. Hall. (2007). Tort Law Change and Its Impact on Society. Successful Office
Group & VOP. Retrieved from: http://www.successfuloffice.com/Tort-%20Law-Change-and-Its-Impact-on-Society.htm
Robert, L. (1979). Impact Analysis and Tort Law: A Comment. Law & Society Review. Wiley.
13 (4) 987-996.
