Sentences with phrase «common law tort for»

«When Clients Intrude Upon the Seclusion of Their Spouses» Personal Email: What the Common Law Tort for the Invasion of Privacy Might Mean for Snooping Spouses and the Electronic Evidence That They Obtain», January 2015.

This ruling is the latest to comment on the state of the potential common law tort for invasion of privacy in Canada.

Despite the fact that the Personal Health Information Protection Act («PHIPA») 1 is a «lengthy and detailed statute» that comprehensively addresses «the collection, use, disclosure, retention and disposal of personal health information», 2 the Court affirmed that plaintiffs are still entitled to raise the common law tort for breaches of privacy in circumstances involving health information.

Not exact matches

They also claim common law causes of action, including for the torts of misfeasance in public office, deceit, assault (trespass to the person) and negligence.

Except as expressly provided herein, any claim, dispute or controversy (whether based upon contract; tort, intentional or otherwise; constitution; statute; common law; or equity and whether pre-existing, present or future), including initial claims, counter-claims, cross-claims and thirdparty claims, arising from or relating to (i) the Card; (ii) any service relating to the Card; (iii) the marketing of the Card; (iv) this Cardholder Agreement, including the validity, enforceability, interpretation, scope, or application of the Agreement and this arbitration provision (except for the prohibition on class or other non-individual claims, which shall be for a court to decide); and (v) any other agreement or instrument relating to the Card or any such service («Claim») shall be decided, upon the election of you or the Bank (or Green Dot Corporation or the Bank's agents, employees, successors, representatives, affiliated companies, or assigns), by binding arbitration pursuant to this arbitration provision and the applicable rules and procedures of the arbitration administrator in effect at the time the Claim is filed.

«A defendant's conduct can not be deemed «unreasonable» when that conduct has been expressly sanctioned by statute, for it is well established that, even where «it would be a nuisance at common law, conduct that is fully authorized by statue, ordinance or administrative regulation does not subject the actor to tort liability.

[Where state trooper took affirmative action of allowing police dog to be off leash, there is no immunity from suit; actions for personal injury caused by police dog will be analyzed under the dog bite common law, whether the owner of the dog knew or should have known of the dog's vicious propensities, as the Massachusetts Tort Claims Act does not permit actions under strict liability.]

Sharpe J.A. wrote for the court, and accepted the proposition by William L. Prosser in his 1960 article, «Privacy,» that the common law actually developed four different types of related torts for breach of privacy:

LAW OF TORTS and LAW OF CONTRACT ARE MOST COMMON LAW IN ALL COUNTRY and even in our NEIGHBOURING COUNTRY Like INDIA, BUT NOT APPLICABLE IN BANGLADESH YET DUE TO WHICH BANGLADESH HAS BECOME A HEAVEN FOR REPRESSION / EXPLOITATION forcing the Process of increasing — Poverty line in Geometric Ration and also helping HUMAN TRAFFICKING in large scale.

Thus, to paraphrase my torts professor, no matter how easy it would be for a 200 - pound, 8th - degree black belt in karate to rescue a child being beaten up by a 7 - year - old girl, the black belt can walk on by under the common law (with certain exceptions, such as when the would - be rescuer is an emergency worker or the victim is your own child).

The court reasoned that insurance coverage for «invasion or violation of privacy» included the common law tort of «intrusion upon seclusion», which necessarily includes intentional, highly offensive invasions of privacy by employees outside a patient's circle of care.

Canada has inherited the English common law, which allows you to sue for damages if a tort has been committed.

For example, the «Ius Commune Casebooks for the Common Law of Europe» include excerpts in English translation of case - law on consumer law, contracts, property, torts, and unjust enrichmeFor example, the «Ius Commune Casebooks for the Common Law of Europe» include excerpts in English translation of case - law on consumer law, contracts, property, torts, and unjust enrichmefor the Common Law of Europe» include excerpts in English translation of case - law on consumer law, contracts, property, torts, and unjust enrichmeLaw of Europe» include excerpts in English translation of case - law on consumer law, contracts, property, torts, and unjust enrichmelaw on consumer law, contracts, property, torts, and unjust enrichmelaw, contracts, property, torts, and unjust enrichment.

Common law is still going strong in New Jersey: I can sue for the tort of negligence, trespass and deceit, I can seek equitable remedies like an injunction and estoppel and I can also sue for breach of contract.

He has prosecuted and defended cases involving claims for breach of contract, breach of fiduciary duty, trademark infringement, copyright infringement, unfair competition, securities and common law fraud, and other business related torts.

While actions to enforce privacy rights have been recognized for years in British Columbia by the Privacy Act, there are some important differences between the common law tort and the statutory right of action.

In addition many academic commentators argued it was time to recognize the tort of invasion of privacy in Canada: Craig, «Invasion of Privacy and Charter Values: The Common - Law Tort Awakens», 42 McGill L.J. 355; Austin, «Privacy and Private Law: The Dilemma of Justification» 55 McGill L.J. 165; Hunt, «Conceptualizing Privacy and Elucidating Its Importance: Foundational Considerations for the Development of Canada's Fledging Privacy Tort», 37 Queen's L.J. tort of invasion of privacy in Canada: Craig, «Invasion of Privacy and Charter Values: The Common - Law Tort Awakens», 42 McGill L.J. 355; Austin, «Privacy and Private Law: The Dilemma of Justification» 55 McGill L.J. 165; Hunt, «Conceptualizing Privacy and Elucidating Its Importance: Foundational Considerations for the Development of Canada's Fledging Privacy Tort», 37 Queen's L.J. Tort Awakens», 42 McGill L.J. 355; Austin, «Privacy and Private Law: The Dilemma of Justification» 55 McGill L.J. 165; Hunt, «Conceptualizing Privacy and Elucidating Its Importance: Foundational Considerations for the Development of Canada's Fledging Privacy Tort», 37 Queen's L.J. Tort», 37 Queen's L.J. 167.

Large bodies of law, for example those relating to property, contracts and torts are usually part of the common law.

At common law, a defendant is liable to pay damages in tort for actions intended to interfere with the plaintiff's contractual relations with a third party.

Both appellants (Austin and Saxby) claimed damages for distress and also aggravated and exemplary damages, at common law in the tort of false imprisonment and under the Human Rights Act 1998, s 7 for alleged unlawful detention, contrary to their Art 5 Convention rights, essentially arguing that they should have been released from the police cordon much earlier than they were.

Lord Scott, in common with all of their lordships, found that the law of tort provides no remedy for those who have contracted pleural plaques as a result of exposure to asbestos dust.

It is rare for the common law, through the tort of negligence, to impose a duty of care on a party to take action to prevent to prevent the infliction of physical harm to a person by the malicious act of another.

For the employment - law Restatements, this means in - depth coverage of everything from contract formation to privacy to state common - law torts.

The «reasonableness» standard is well - established in law; for example, it is the foundation of the common law of torts.

So to call a tort a «délit» in French is not accurate, because a tort in common law is not the same as a délit in civil law, or a delict, for that matter (since there is good English for civil law — as spoken in Scotland, Louisiana and other anglophone civil law jurisdictions.

While at common law the employer is liable for the torts of an employee committed in the ordinary course of employment, the Appellant's alleged liability in this case arose from the provisions of the Traffic Safety Act.

For ``... R (D) A 1886, like its predecessors, created a self - contained statutory scheme which did not mirror the common law of tort.»

Well, methinks the SCC, right now, isn't sufficiently interested in attempting to make entirely coherent (or even sufficiently coherent) if that were possible the Canadian common law on damages, or some other aspect of tort law, particulary if doing so would force it to deal with inconsistencies in its own jurisprudence and, perhaps, to concede in one way or another that it's not now practicable for the SCC to undertake a wholesale cleanup.

The court has a common law jurisdiction to award interest, simple and compound, as damages on claims for non-payment of debts as well as on other claims for breach of contract and in tort.

Therefore, the court had a common law jurisdiction to award interest, simple and compound, as damages on claims for non-payment of debts as well as on other claims for breach of contract and in tort.

However, it is sometimes criticized for restricting workers» common - law rights, such as suit in tort for negligence.

For US auto insurance this is the most common kind of tort — it's clear that an accident is most likely to involve some form of contributory negligence for which a party (or parties) to that accident will most likely be held liable in a court of lFor US auto insurance this is the most common kind of tort — it's clear that an accident is most likely to involve some form of contributory negligence for which a party (or parties) to that accident will most likely be held liable in a court of lfor which a party (or parties) to that accident will most likely be held liable in a court of law.

BitcoinRewards will not be liable for any special, indirect or consequential loss or damage, loss of profit or opportunity, or damage to goodwill arising out of or in connection with the Services or these Terms (including as a result of not being able to use the Services or the late supply of the Services), whether at common law, under contract, tort (including negligence), in equity, pursuant to statute or otherwise, subject to the relevant provisions of the Australian Consumer Law, as it may applaw, under contract, tort (including negligence), in equity, pursuant to statute or otherwise, subject to the relevant provisions of the Australian Consumer Law, as it may appLaw, as it may apply.

Subject to any non-excludable rights and to the maximum extent permitted under the law, in no event will Relationships Australia (NSW) Limited and its employees be liable for any damages whatsoever (including, without limitation, direct, indirect, punitive, special, consequential damages, lost profits, lost data or business interruption) arising out of the use, inability to use, or the results of use of this Site, any web sites linked to this Site, or the materials or information contained at any or all such sites, whether based on contract, tort, statute, common law, equity or any other legal theory and whether or not advised of the possibility of such damages.