Menace By Stray Dogs Won't Go Out of Hand: Says SC
On Wednesday, the Supreme Court (SC), which heard appeals relating to the menace of street dogs, declared that it would not shy away from taking up cases involving orders issued by different civic bodies concerning wild dogs.
Highlighting Kerala and Mumbai, the SC stated that it would not widen the parameters of such cases. Many petitions, as observed involved cases under the Kerala Municipality Act, 1994, the Animal Birth Control (Dogs) Rules, 2001, and the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960, are being considered by the SC.
A few of the petitions deal with the Bombay High Court’s 2022 observation regarding individuals who are interested in the protection and welfare of stray dogs, including providing their food, housing them in dog shelters, and covering maintenance costs.
One of the pleas addresses the issue of Kerala’s stray dog culling programme. The SC stated in a hearing on Wednesday, that the parties should review the Animal Birth Control Rules, 2023, because many of the concerns voiced earlier might be settled with a brief review.
Judges Sanjay Karol and J K Maheshwari stated that while they are not afraid to address these matters, they will not consent to its scope being broadened.
The Bench said that one needs to get into the depth of the crux of the matter. There was a discussion on the implementation of the 2023 guidelines, at the suggestion of one of the attorneys.
In this discussion, a different advocate cited a recent advisory from the Animal Welfare Board of India (AWBI) and stated, that if one goes through it, then 90% of the problem of stray animals can be resolved.
Hence, the authorities are expected to examine and deal with these issues as per 2023 guidelines, which can resolve all their issues.
The top court stated that the parties are free to go and seek a remedy before the high courts if a problem persists after that, and it scheduled a follow-up hearing on 8th May 2024.
The SC declined to issue any interim directive during the plea hearing in September of last year, stating that it would decide after reviewing the prevailing laws, regulations, and their application.
The Apex Court had requested that the AWBI provide an affidavit with information on dog-bite incidences that had occurred in recent years in various states and well-known cities during the earlier sessions.
The SC has ruled that animal rights and public safety must coexist in harmony. Hence, to allow local authorities to address the problem of stray dogs as per the law, certain NGOs and individual petitioners have petitioned the SC against rulings made by some high courts, such as Bombay and Kerala high courts.
Mamata Banerjee Claims That the Teacher Recruitment Scam is Influenced by BJP
Mamta Banerjee, the Chief Minister of West Bengal, claimed that BJP officials have been influencing the judges and rulings, branding the Calcutta High Court (HC) verdict that nullified the appointments of teachers selected through the 2016 recruitment test “illegal” on Monday.
Mamta said, one can stand by those people who lost their jobs. She further announced that the Trinamool administration would appeal the HC decision to the Supreme Court (SC).
Earlier, the HC ruled that all appointments made during the 2016 recruitment process to choose candidates for West Bengal government-sponsored and aided secondary and higher secondary schools were void. The School Service Commission (SSC) has been directed by the court to hold new hiring.
All appointments made by the SSC to the groups of group C and D staffers and instructors of classes 9, 10, 11, and 12 as well as staff members selected through the State Level Selection-2016 (SLST) where anomalies were discovered have also been deemed void.
The SC further mandated that individuals who were hired without authorization refund their income within six weeks. Following the consideration of petitions and appeals over alleged anomalies in the applicant selection process during the 2016 recruitment campaign, the court rendered its decision.
The case was being heard by a division bench that the SC had ordered to be established by the Chief Judge of the HC. On 20th March, the matter’s hearing was ended, and the division bench postponed deciding.
Following the arrest of Bengal BJP leader Partha Chatterjee, a Trinamool Congress leader who held the position of education minister in Mamata Banerjee’s cabinet until his arrest on 23rd July 2022, the West Bengal School Service Commission (SSC) teacher recruitment scandal came to light.
An Enforcement Directorate (ED) squad raided Partha Chatterjee’s close acquaintances in Kolkata earlier on 16th February.
Following the discovery of jewellery and cash valued at over Rs. 1 crore and Rs. 21 crore from the Kolkata home of Arpita Mukherjee, a close assistant to the former education minister, Chatterjee was taken into custody.
An investigation into Chatterjee and his assistant Arpita Mukherjee’s involvement in the West Bengal SSC recruitment fraud is ongoing.
Abhijit Gangopadhyay demands Mamata step down. Abhijit Gangopadhyay, a former HC judge running on the BJP ticket for the Lok Sabha, called for Mamata Banerjee’s immediate resignation following the ruling.
He referred to the ruling that cancelled all appointments made in West Bengal government-sponsored and assisted schools through the State Level Selection Test-2016 (SLST) recruiting process as an “appropriate judgement.”
A single bench led by Gangopadhyay had already ordered a CBI investigation into alleged irregularities in the recruiting process.
He claimed that the entire group of fraudsters in the state administration, who carried out the scheme must be hanged.
Abortion Laws- SC Permits the Abortion of a 30-Week Foetus
Abortion Laws- SC Permits the Abortion of a 30-Week Foetus
A 14-year-old girl who was sexually assaulted has been granted permission by the Supreme Court (SC) to end her almost 30-week pregnancy.
On 22nd April 2024, Monday, a bench headed by Chief Justice of India (CJI) D Y Chandrachud declared that the girl’s circumstance was “very very exceptional” and that “we have to protect her.”
A Bench stated that the dean of a Mumbai municipal hospital had “clearly opined that the continuation of the pregnancy against the minor’s will may impact negatively on the minor’s physical and mental well-being, who is barely 14 years old,” in a report submitted on the matter.
What is the Abortion Law?
Pregnancy can be terminated in the following situations according to the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act, 1971 (MTP Act). Termination on the recommendation of one doctor is permitted for up to 20 weeks. Abortion is permitted as an exception for pregnancies between 20 and 24 weeks, but only in specific circumstances and following the assessment of the right to terminate the pregnancy by two licenced medical professionals.
Seven categories of forced pregnancies are listed in Section 3B of the Rules under the MTP Act. These categories include women with impairments, statutory rape in cases of sexual assaults or children, or when a woman’s marital status changes while she is pregnant.
The law mandates that a medical board be established in approved facilities after 24 weeks of pregnancy. This Board will only be able to “allow or deny termination of pregnancy” if there is a significant foetal abnormality.
Has the Court Permitted Termination for a Longer Amount of Time?
In certain instances, yes it has. On 1st February, of this year, the Delhi High Court (HC) granted the 26-year-old woman’s request to end her 32-week pregnancy but then revoked its decision when the Centre urged the court to take the unborn child’s right to life into consideration.
On 16th October 2023, a married woman seeking an abortion in her third pregnancy was denied by a three-judge bench presided over by the Chief Justice of India.
The lady claimed that her pregnancy was unforeseen and that she lacked the financial means and mental capacity to raise the kid.
Following a divided decision on the woman’s petition by a two-judge bench, this case was transferred to a three-judge bench. The abortion was permitted on 9th October, by this bench, which was made up of Justices Hima Kohli and B V Nagarathna.
However, Justice Kohli overturned her decision when the Union Government requested a recall order in response to a report from an AIIMS doctor stating that the foetus was viable.
Previously, on 21st August 2023, a bench led by Justice Nagarathna convened a special meeting on a Saturday- the day the court normally closed- to approve the rape survivor’s pregnancy termination at 27 weeks and 3 days.
Before that, in September 2022, an unmarried woman who was 24 weeks pregnant and had been in a consenting relationship was granted an abortion by a bench chaired by Justice Chandrachud, who was not the Chief Justice at the time.
In that instance, the Bench noted that transformative constitutionalism promotes and engenders social change and stated that the law needs to continue to consider the fact that considerable changes in family arrangements have resulted from societal developments.
There have also been cases where a court has invalidated the medical board’s decision to permit termination.
The Gauhati HC overturned the medical board’s decision to withhold an opinion about the termination of a child rape survivor’s pregnancy of more than 26 weeks in “Bhatou Boro v. State of Assam” (2017).
Consideration of “Foetal Viability”
The CJI-led Bench stated on 13th October, 2023, that it was important to balance out the rights of an unborn kid, and that a woman’s rights must trump when it came to abortion.
Meaning of “Foetal Viability”
In 1973, foetal viability was estimated to be 28 weeks, however, due to scientific advancements, it is now estimated to be 23-24 weeks.
Our legal system is superior to those of other nations. This will not be a “Roe versus Wade” scenario. The CJI noted that our law is pro-choice and liberal.
Although courts have interpreted the MTP Act, broadly, India is a new country where abortion is permitted only if the threshold of “foetal viability” is met.
The historic Roe v. Wade decision from the US Supreme Court in 1973 recognised abortion as a constitutional right and permitted abortion up to the point of foetal viability, or the moment at which a baby may survive outside the womb.
The law in India is criticized for giving doctors, not the woman, the authority to decide whether to end a pregnancy after 20 weeks.
Even while there is not a legal challenge to this part, there is a legislative gap indicated by the many instances in which women approach the court at the last minute.
The legal framework in India on reproductive rights leans more in favour of the woman’s ability to make her own decisions than it does for the rights of the unborn child.
USA- Can A Person Be Sued For Verbally Assaulting, Yelling And Insulting?
USA- Can A Person Be Sued For Verbally Assaulting, Yelling And Insulting?
Yes, in certain limited situations, a person verbally insulting or assaulting you can be sued. When an insult crosses its limits, then there are some clear statements, that can explain the difference between legal issues and bad interaction. For instance, if a person feels insecure and threatened, if yelling is done violently, then this leads to civil tort and is considered illegal in every state.
An inflection of emotional distress, which is intentional or comes under the category of assault is a civil tort. On the other hand, credible threatening violence is considered a criminal offence. For instance, if some mean children threaten a person, on Xbox Live, then that does not come under the category of tort or crime.
What actions can be taken against your insult?
There are always certain limits to freedom of speech. If a person’s conscience is shocked by the insult, and it inflicts a certain degree of mental anguish in a person, then these insults come under the First Amendment of the Constitution.
Any form of verbal abuse that causes an adverse physical reaction or it offends a person by invoking violence, is subjected to certain limits.
The burden of proof lies on the plaintiff to prove whether the other person has acted intentionally against the former, with a motive to create distress injury, emotional hurt, or shock.
Freedom of speech does not extend to defamation, injuring a person’s reputation, giving false statements, or insulting in a discriminatory manner.
All these acts create additional liability by the state law, on the wrongdoer. For instance, racial slurs, or discriminatory conduct in California are legally charged and are strictly prohibited under Unruh Act, as an integral part of this law.
Law of Tort for Assault –
Actual beating or hitting another person is part of assault, and not assault itself. For assault, the aggressor must make an overstatement or act making another person fear, for their security.
If a person is yelling intending to hurt or hit someone, and the listener feels a substantial and credible threat, these sets of acts, come under the ambit of assault. For instance, if a person is warning to hit you on your face, might not be assault, until the former raises their fist to attack the listener.
Hence, a playful insult does not amount to emotional distress or a defamatory statement. The urgency of a potential threat or danger and an act that crosses the threshold is part of offence.
In a civil court, an assault to become actionable must fear the other person for their safety, and because of this act, they have suffered injuries. Only in that case, injuries will cover both tangible financial losses or will come under the ambit of emotional distress.
Can You Sue A Person Who Intentionally Transmitted You An STD?
Can You Sue A Person Who Intentionally Transmitted You An STD?
“Cases of injury concerning disclosure and infection with Sexually Transmitted Diseases (STDs) occur when someone reveals that they have an STD. There could be a legal ground for both the situations.” As written by Attorney Coulter Boeschen, from the University of Michigan Law School.
There are two different types of legal actions related to STDs:
Lawsuits based on the defendant’s infection of the plaintiff, or
On the disclosure made by the plaintiff to third parties by the defendant of the plaintiff’s STD.
These two categories of litigation, are covered in this article.
Liability For Infecting Others
Several legal theories (or causes of action) allow a plaintiff to sue a defendant for transmitting an STD, like, battery, fraud, or negligence.
Battery
Similar to other civil battery actions, a battery cause of action for the transmission of an STD involves the defendant’s deliberate, unintentional or unconsented injurious contact with the plaintiff.
In an STD case, the plaintiff may agree to have sexual activity, but not when it comes with a recognised risk of developing an STD. Furthermore, it suffices for the defendant to proceed with sexual activity knowing that there are probable chances of having an intentional attempt to spread the STD.
Hence, for a civil battery claim to proceed successfully, the defendant must have actual knowledge that he or she is likely to have an STD or is afflicted with one.
Negligence
To establish a theory of negligence, the plaintiff must present that the defendant owed them responsibility and that they were aware that the defendant was likely to transmit the STD to the plaintiff.
Invariable, almost a judge will determine that the defendant must tell a sexual partner that they have an STD. Therefore, it is possible that the defendant will be held liable if they had sexual contact with the plaintiff, should have known about the STD, and still spread the disease.
Remember that even though there was no transmission, there are circumstances in which it is still feasible to file a lawsuit for exposure to an STD. Cases of this category may be founded on negligence or intentional infliction of emotional anguish.
Fraud
If the defendant concealed facts about STD, from the plaintiff, that they knew they had, or were likely to have, an STD to engage in sexual activity, there may be a fraud cause of action.
Accountability For Leaking Information About An STD
Depending on the situation, telling people, that someone has an STD, may put you at danger or risk of being sued for privacy invasion, and revealing personal information publicly.
When the defendant violates the privacy of a plaintiff in a manner that is “highly offensive or derogatory”, to the general public and also involves information that is legitimately believed to be private, it is deemed as an invasion of privacy.
When information about the personal life of the plaintiff is revealed to the public, even if they are “highly offensive” and the issue is unrelated to the public, liability for public disclosure of private facts arises.
Given the similarities between the above two causes of action, revealing a plaintiff’s STD status can and will be subjected to liability on the defendant, under either theory.
Most states have laws that regulate the disclosure of the HIV status of the plaintiff. With very few exceptions, such as medical procedures and court cases. It is generally prohibited to reveal another person’s HIV status in these exceptions. A civil action (i.e., a plaintiff suing the person who revealed the former’s HIV status) may be justified in some cases, but not in others.
Healthcare Provider’s Responsibility For Disclosure Or Transmission
Recalling the medical professionals about their accountability, if a patient is exposed or contacts an STD. When infections occur in medical settings, it gives rise to medical malpractice cases, for which the plaintiff is subject to regulations.
The only exception will be if sexual activity was the reason for transmission of the STD, in which the medical malpractice laws would not be applicable.
Medical professionals are frequently permitted by law to reveal a patient’s status for STDs. A medical practitioner can inform hospital workers and anybody else who might be at risk of infection – such as the infected person’s sexual partners-about STDs other than HIV.
In comparable situations, it is possible to disclose HIV, but most states have stricter legislation governing this category of disclosure.
The Impact Of Criminal Laws
Criminal laws that specifically target the spread of STDs and other related illnesses are present in most of the states. In a civil trial, the plaintiff may be able to present the defendant’s criminal conviction as proof of their liability if the defendant is found guilty in a criminal trial. Keeping in mind that a victim cannot receive monetary damages, one must be aware of these damages on a criminal conviction.
In STD Cases, Civil Damages
Legal actions about the spread of STDs often provide the same kinds of injury compensation as other personal injury lawsuits. If there are no serious medical complications or acute physical symptoms, the plaintiff’s mental anguish and lifestyle adjustment would account for most damages.
If a plaintiff is exposed to an STD but is not infected, the damages would be determined by the intense fear and anxiety the plaintiff experiences upon knowing they may have an STD.
The emotional distress brought on by stigmatization, embarrassment, and/or discriminatory treatment, can result from an STD being disclosed publically.
Can A Dating App Be Sued If The Date Becomes A Threat?
Can A Dating App Be Sued If The Date Becomes A Threat?
Living in a highly digitalized society, finding, and meeting new people offline, is very hard, hence, the concept of dating apps is increasing day by day. Considering the safety of dating apps like Hinge, Grinder, Tinder, Plenty of Fish, eHarmony, OKCupid, and Bumble, there are many questions raised about their security standards.
These apps allow any user to create a profile, without the latter’s criminal background check. So what should you do when your date becomes dangerous or is there any way to sue these apps?
The answer is that the Communications Decency Act bars the liability of any dating app that creates harm to a person by a third-party user. Under the negligence theory of tort law, the duty to take care, only exists, when the parties accommodate a special relationship.
Analyzing the relationship between App users and the Dating app
When Match.com matched Wade Riley and Kay Beckman, Wade viciously beat and stabbed Beckman. Beckman filed a lawsuit against Match.com. The victim argued that it was the duty of Match to warn her regarding the danger involved in her date, but the courts did not agree to this argument.
Instead, the courts explained that there was no special relationship between Beckman and Match.com, hence duty to take care, warn or duty to protect, does not lie on Match.com.
Hence, the Ninth Circuit ruling determined there is no existing special relationship between the dating app user and the app itself.
Unfortunately, dating apps have no actual knowledge!
Dating apps are formed in such a way that they will not find knowledge about their users, through any of their ways.
The duty to warn exists only when the app is aware of users found guilty of committing violent acts, and only that can raise the level of foreseeable harm in future for the other users. In the case of Beckham, Match was unaware of the criminal history of Ridley, which included battery, and domestic violence, for about ten years.
How safe are you on a dating app?
In 2023, a Pew Research poll on women under 50 years of age shared that:
11% of them received harmful threats
37% received offensive names for them
56% were given sexually explicit images or messages in an unwelcome manner
43% received unwanted texts, even when shown disinterest in the person who is texting.
In 2022, the Office of Justice Programs (OJP) reported that generally, most sexual assault acts happen on the first in-person date. 60% of polled Americans think that criminal background checks must be conducted by these dating platforms, before creating a profile.
What measures and laws protect you from assault?
Avoid scams, by not giving personal and confidential information about your banking and contact details.
Avoid catfishing, where fake profiles are created to harm you.
Do not let your date pick or drop you off use your transportation
Never choose remote locations, instead choose public places
Let your family or friends know where and when you are returning back
Listen to your gut feeling and look for red flags
Search the name of your date on the registered sex offenders list in your area, on the government’s Public Sex Offender Registry
Call 911 when you feel unsafe
If physically injured, then immediately get medical help
Keep DNA evidence such as skin underneath fingernails or clothing
Make a police complaint immediately
Seek resources for emotional wellbeing and proper counselling
Seeking a legal advisor or personal injury attorney locally can also help you. These experts can help share insights on secure protective orders, against the assailant, and can even successfully help you with proper compensation. Also, if you have been hurt psychologically or physically, then your attorney can get you reimbursement for your suffering and pain. For the future, know the red flags, on online dating apps to protect yourself.
Categories Of Personal Injury Instances Under “Intentional Tort”
Categories Of Personal Injury Instances Under “Intentional Tort”
While most personal injury lawsuits are rooted in negligence (automobile accidents being a prominent example), certain claims of injury may occur when somebody intentionally causes harm to another individual, which is known as “damages” in civil law.
David Goguen, J.D., University of San Francisco School Of Law, updated by Coulter Boeschen, Attorney (University of Michigan Law School, states that “While most injury-related civil actions happen from accidents, but deliberate torts are instances in which someone intentionally causes injury to another person.”
Here are a few instances of what is covered under the category of “damages”:
False Imprisonment
Battery and Assault
Defamation
Conversion (which is essentially the stolen crime’s civil law counterpart)
Let’s Understand The Term “Intentional Tort”!
A person who intentionally causes injury to another person is said to have committed an intentional tort (as opposed to harm that is caused by negligence, such as injuries caused by a car crash or some other sort of mishap).
Some courts will hear cases where the defendant intended to cause intentional tort, to perform any act that injured the plaintiff, but none of the previously established categories fit the facts.
Hence, intentional tort lawsuits in civil courts are typically judged on allegations that the defendant (the party which brought personal injury intentionally to the plaintiff, who is bringing the lawsuit or is psychologically or physically harmed), This harm can fall under assault, false imprisonment, conversion, trespassing on private property, fraud/deception, and defamation.
Study more about deliberate torts versus negligence-based damage cases to better comprehend the differences between these types of claims based on purposeful behaviour and those based on an accident.
Let us examine the various acts that may result in a purposeful tort case in more detail:
Assault And Battery
In a civil proceeding, assault and battery are two closely related terms but typically separate allegations. An intentional harm that leads another person to apprehend or fear an offensive contact or immediate harm, is termed as assault. When the defendant deliberately makes an injurious touch or offensive act, with the plaintiff, because of their intentional behaviour, is considered a battery.
To present it simply, an assault entails the threat of harmful contact, but a battery entails the actual occurrence of offensive or hurtful touching. A criminal case may also stem from battery and assault.
False Arrest and Imprisonment
When a defendant uses actual force or threats to use actual force to hold or restrict the plaintiff’s freedom of movement, they may be accountable for false imprisonment. False Imprisonment can occur from an unlawful detention, followed by legitimate arrest or from an unlawful detention without an arrest. Hence, false arrest, which is frequently seen as a form of false imprisonment, occurs when the defendant forcibly holds the plaintiff at the time of the arrest.
Keep in mind that anybody can be held accountable for wrongful arrest and false imprisonment -not just police officials or other authorities like a private security guard or store owner.
Fraud/Deceit
The term “fraud” is highly general and can refer to many different types of misrepresentations, deceptions, and scams. A more precise form of fraud known as “deceit” is typically used to characterise a defendant’s deliberate act of providing the plaintiff with a damaging and harmful false misrepresentation.
Intentional Infliction Of Emotional Anguish
When a defendant engages in “extreme or outrageous” behaviour, it is usually negligent or purposefully done, so that the plaintiff suffers significant emotional distress. Outrageous or extreme conduct is difficult to define precisely and is typically up for interpretation by the judge or jury. However, it is widely understood to mean acting beyond the bounds of decency and is completely intolerable and unacceptable in a society or community that is civilized.
Conversion
The civil law counterpart of theft is called conversion. For any act that happens, without the permission of the plaintiff, a conversion takes place. When the defendant “exercises control and dominion, over the plaintiff’s property, without the plaintiff’s consent, it is termed as conversion. However, the damages will vary based on the duration in which the plaintiff was deprived of the property -including whether it was lost, destroyed or otherwise. Hence, conversion takes place regardless of whether the defendant gives the plaintiff back the property.
“Catch-All” Intentional Tort
When the circumstances of a case do not fall under any of the other intentional tort types covered above, some states recognise a “catch-all” intentional tort. The plaintiff usually must demonstrate that the defendant intentionally caused harm to the plaintiff, even though the standards differentiate between states. In many states, the defendant must have intended to damage the plaintiff in addition to just intending to conduct the act that caused the harm.
Getting Legal Assistance For An Intentional Tort Case
One cathartic and powerful option to make amends is to file a civil action for damages caused by violence, false imprisonment, or other malicious behaviour, but there may be several obstacles in your path.
That is why speaking with a qualified legal expert about your situation and available options could make sense for you. Find out the legal services that a personal injury attorney may provide, as well as how to choose the best injury advocate for your situation. Additionally, you can get in touch with a knowledgeable personal injury attorney in your region by using the tools on this website.
Personal Injury Cases- Intentional Tort Versus Negligence
Personal Injury Cases- Intentional Tort Versus Negligence
For purposeful versus unintentional injuries (called “torts” in legalese), different standards apply regarding liability.
Updated by University of San Francisco School of Law’s David Goguen, J.D.
The type of harm being asserted will determine how an injury-related insurance claim or civil case plays out. Although there are several personal injury cases and their types, nearly all of them are judged on one of two main theories:
Either the defendant intentionally caused injuries to the plaintiff, or the plaintiff (the injured person) experienced harm because of the defendant’s negligence.
Intentional torts are captured in the second scenario, while negligence-based torts are covered in the first.
This article will examine the definitions of deliberate and negligent torts in more detail, provide examples of both, and cover other related topics.
(Note: A legal wrong committed by one person against another is referred to as “tort” in personal injury legislation).
Accident-Related Torts
Most injury lawsuits resulting from accidents, such as those involving cars and slip-and-fall occurrences, are categorized as negligence-based torts. A negligence-based case typically consists of the following four key elements:
Duty
To protect others from foreseeable harm, it is generally our legal duty to take the kind and level of care that a prudent person would do in any given situation. All drivers have a legal obligation to operate their cars with reasonable care in the event of an automobile collision. This entails following traffic regulations, driving especially cautiously during inclement weather, and maintaining a vehicle’s upkeep. Find out more about personal injury law’s duty to take care of.
Breach Of Causation And Duty
Any behaviour that is irrational and irresponsible in the given situation constitutes a violation of the previously mentioned legal duty to take care of. Using the example of an automobile collision, a driver who runs a red light and hits another vehicle has violated both his legal duty to care and his obligation to drive carefully. In most of the situations, causality is obvious. In essence, the plaintiff’s injuries must be directly caused by the defendant’s actions. Find out more about the reasons and faults of such an accident:
Intentional Torts
Intentional torture, as the name implies, is one of those wrongdoings in law that are done with deliberate intent. Rather than causing harm by accident or through carelessness, most intentional tort cases happen when the defendant acts with the intent to cause actual hurt or offence to another person (or at least the danger of injury or offence), due to negligence.
Intentional tort claims are listed below:
Power source
Even in events when no physical harm is sustained, nearly any offensive or harmful touch qualifies as a battery.
Assault
Although state legislations differ, assault is generally defined as any deliberate act that gives rise to a reasonable fear of immediate harm for the victim (for instance, pointing a loaded gun at someone).
False Imprisonment
When a person intentionally restricts the movement of a person, either constructively or physically) without having the legal authority to do such an act, this kind of claim arises. For instance, a security guard unjustly detains a suspect in shoplifting.
Trespassing
An intentional or wilful tort may arise from someone breaking into another person’s property without consent, authority, or permission.
Defences Against Claim of Intentional Tort
The most frequent defences to an intentional tort claim are that the defendant acted with the plaintiff’s consent (i.e., the defendant touched the plaintiff with permission or entered the premises of the plaintiff with consent) and that the defendant was acting in self-defence or defence of a third party.
Intentional Torts and Criminal Penalties
Criminal charges are another possibility for many deliberate torts. For instance, if the plaintiff is hurt in a battery and/or assault incident, then the victim may sue the attacker for personal injury. Such a claim can be made to acquire monetary damages, and the local attorney may file criminal charges against the attacker following state criminal statutes that classify “assault and battery” as a criminal act.
Similar to this, in certain areas, false imprisonment is regarded as both a criminal and a civil wrong. In addition to this, the same incident may give rise to a criminal charge of kidnapping as well as a claim for personal injury.
Damages
The plaintiff in any negligence-based tort case must have faced actual damages and injuries from the incident or accident. Such typical instances of compensable damages are as follows:
UK Supreme Court Rules Against Artificial Intelligence As Patent Right Inventor
UK Supreme Court Rules Against Artificial Intelligence As Patent Right Inventor
The UK Supreme Court (SC) has decided against accepting Artificial Intelligence (AI) as a patent right inventor. The lawsuit was filed concerning US computer scientist Stephen Thaler’s attempt to get UK patent registration for innovations produced by the AI system, DABUS.
Thaler’s attempt was rejected by the Intellectual Property Office in the UK, which said that an actual person or a firm should be given patent rights rather than a machine, which is artificially produced.
The decision opens a more general question of whether patents should be granted for technological advancements produced by AI. The SC affirmed that an inventor must be a natural person for the application of UK patent law.
Key considerations:
Rejection of Thaler’s Attempt: The Appeal of Thaler was unanimously rejected by the Supreme Court in the UK, confirming that the Intellectual Property Office in the UK denied his application to register patents for patents that are produced by AI.
Concerns of the Legal Team: The legal team for Thaler raised worries that the UK’s current system of patent rights is not sufficient to protect inventions that are generated by AI, which could impede sectors that depend on AI-driven advanced technological developments.
IPO appreciating Clarity By SC: The ruling given by the Supreme Court, clarified that the current legislative framework regarding patenting of AI-generated creations was warmly accepted by the UK Intellectual Property Office.
Commitment given by the UK Government: The UK Government has pledged to continue the review of this area of law, acknowledging the dynamic features of intellectual property and works of art that are generated by AI.
The consistent decision in the Global Context: The decision aligned with the rulings from United States, European, and Australian courts. In the medium term, possible changes were seen by legal experts as AI has transformed itself from science to agency.
Restricted Immediate Effect: Although legal experts did not address possible issues in patent laws, as AI is growing continuously, it is not anticipated that the decision will have a large impact on the patent system at this point.
Separate Neural Network Case: Last month, the London High Court upheld the validation of artificial neural networks under UK law in a different case, which also attracted patent protection under this law.
Canada: Review Board States That Doctors Are Supposed to Ensure The Patient Is Aware of What Examination Comprises
Canada: Review Board States That Doctors Are Supposed to Ensure The Patient Is Aware of What Examination Comprises
An inquiry committee decided to take no further action after conducting a sufficient probe into a patient’s complaint that a physician had inappropriately grabbed her breast during her physical examination, as per the tribunal ruling.
In January 2022, the patient went to the doctor’s office, for a consultation regarding a thyroid cyst. During the appointment, she claimed the following things happened. She was called into the doctor’s office and told to take off her jacket. After looking over her test results, he moved his chair over to face her and reassured her that everything would be fine.
He inserted a wire into her nostril and then covered her thyroid area with a stethoscope. The stethoscope was then moved towards her chest, then her stomach, and finally beneath her left breast. He did not provide her an explanation for these inappropriate actions.
The patient was scared and anxious about what had transpired since she felt that she should not be alone with a doctor because of her cultural beliefs. She complained about the doctor in writing. She provided detectives with more information during an in-detail phone interview with the assistance of an interpreter.
The doctor responded by outlining his action plans for the day. He examined the patient’s oropharynx, oral cavity, oropharynx, and ears. Upon palpating her thyroid area and her neck, he felt for any nodes or lumps. He put a stethoscope over her upper back over her clothes, over her trachea in the anterior neck, and above the clavicles. Using a flexible nasopharyngoscope, he examined her vocal cords and upper respiratory tract.
The doctor denied placing a stethoscope beneath her clothes or anyplace else on her body, such as her lower chest or breasts. The College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontorio’s Inquiries, Complaints, and Reports Committee investigated the complaint and decided not to continue further with him.
However, they did explain that it was expected of all doctors to get consent first, before carrying forward any examination and to make sure that the patient knew what was happening to him.
The patient asked for a review of the committee’s decision. She argued that the committee ought to have investigated her complaint more thoroughly and that they had mistrusted the doctor.
Doctor Wins Over Review Board
Under Section 35(1) of Ontario’s Health Professions Procedural Code, 1991, the Ontario Health Professions Appeal and Review Panel upheld the committee’s decision to take no further action in Betzoo v. Katyal, 2023. CanLII 111770 (ON HPARB).
The Board also noted that doctors were required to get consent before performing a medical examination and to make sure the patient understood what would happen during this procedure. The review board agreed that the patient was dissatisfied with the result. Nonetheless, it concluded that the committee carried out a sufficient investigation and reached a reasonable decision.
The review board concluded that the inquiry adequately documented the incidents and gathered relevant data from the patient, doctor, and his administrative assistant, to analyze the complaint about his deeds and behavior. Medical records and contemporaneous medical notes from the medical examination by the doctor were included in the above documents.
The administrative assistant, who confirmed that there were no odd occurrences or events and that the patient did not appear unhappy upon leaving the office, that day, was also interrogated by the committee and transcribed. The review board stated that the decision of the committee demonstrated a cogent and logical relationship, between the existing facts, the process and the conclusion of reasoning, have led to that conclusion.
Hence, the decision was intelligent, understandable, clear-cut, and well-reasoned overall. The ruling answered the questions posed, explained the criteria considered, and provided thorough citations to the documentation that supported the findings of the committee.
The patient’s deeply held belief was acknowledged by the review board. It did, however, consider the material in the record and found that it was in line with the findings of the committee. The review board further stated that the committee acknowledged its expectations for doctors and replied to the complaints of the patient.
Shop owners who are engaged in a “losing battle” and are frustrated by the shoplifting epidemic in Britain claim that the number of thefts has increased by 25% over the previous year.
As a wave of retail crime sweeps the nation, traders are seeing their highest-ever amounts of shop thefts as aggressive and brazen thieves attack establishments.
Additionally, they have informed The Independent that it is a “waste of time” to call the police officials because they put themselves at risk by enforcing the law on their own.
An employee at Holland & Barrett in central London was doused a sprayed with a burning substance after confronting a shoplifter, and a burglar in Bristol lunged a knife at Tesco employees, illustrating the risks.
The Office for National Statistics (ONS) reports that in the year ending in June, there were approximately 365,164 shoplifting offences reported to police in England and Wales, a 25% increment from the previous year.
Retailers stand to lose and suffer loss of £953 million by 2022 as offenders appear to be directed by criminal gangs, and are growing “emboldened” according to the British Independent Retailers Association.
While many persons have pointed fingers at the problem in the cost of living, others, such as Dame Sharon White, the head of John Lewis, have said that “crime groups” are to be blamed.
The largest number of store thefts has been seen in London, which is 47,153 in number. Upto 1% increase from the previous year, according to ONS data records. West Yorkshire comes at number second position and then West Midlands, where the numbers have increased by 26% to 19,172, with Birmingham serving as the epicentre of the region.
Shop owners and shopkeepers in Birmingham report that they deal with up to ten shoplifting instances per day. These instances involve offenders ranging from children of 10 years of age to organized criminals. They also stated that local police seem inefficient and powerless.
A chemist in one part has even created a “wall of shame” at his business listing potential shoplifters. DIY store keepers Whasuf Farooq stresses that companies must now take precautions to protect themselves.
He further stated that it is a major issue for all shops, and is getting worse it has turned into an epidemic. People are stealing such small things; they are unable to stop themselves because it has become a habit.
A security guard is hired at the large Poundland store in the city centre to deter shoplifters, but sales associate Kelvin Blake claims that this does not suppress criminals.
Different people try it, including suit-wearing persons, the homeless, and even kids, as soon as they leave the front door, they realise that they are free because they are not being pursued outside.
A stronger deterrent is what is required by these shop owners. One day Kelvin witnessed people being apprehended and turned over to the police, and the next, they returned to attempt the theft.
Mohammed Abrar, manager of MS Cosmetics, a store near the Bullring shopping area, stated that he caught several shoplifters every day, many of whom were youth, who target low-value goods like lip balm.
He even said that when one day, he stopped these shoplifters, they either admitted or tried to flee away. These shoplifters are unable to catch everyone, which hurts them the most. If young individuals are detected, then parenting needs to be questioned. These shoppers are suffering from losses equal to £30 a day, as per Abrar.
Similar instances as reported by Junaid Ahmed have been reported from Beauty Central, where he reported to stationing employees at the door and practically tagging every displayed item.
Businesses in the core areas are severely impacted because of increasing theft and antisocial behaviour, as per West Midlands Police. According to a force spokesman, patrols have been “ramped up” to target frequent shoplifters and lower crime rates.
Bosses of Tesco and Primark, and 90 corporate executives nationwide, expressed their concerns about retail crime, particularly violence against workers, in a letter to Home Secretary Suella Braverman.
The Government is already planning to bring such criminals into the regime of prison sentences for repeat shoplifters. To catch the criminals, the met police are deploying facial recognition technology.
Although there are worries that individuals may experience a cost of living crisis, which will eventually turn worse, they are penalized heavily.
The Computer Emergency Response Team (CERT-In) Excluded From RTI
The Computer Emergency Response Team (CERT-In) has recently been included by the central government in the list of organizations exempted from the Right to Information Act (RTI), 2005.
CERT-In, which is the national agency responsible for responding to computer security incidents, falls under the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology.
The said decision has raised concerns as it puts limitations relating to transparency for an entity dominant and crucial in addressing cyber threats and enhancing security awareness.
CERT-In plays an important role in responding to computer security incidents promptly.
Enhancement of security awareness among common citizens is one of its main objectives.
CERT-In functions under the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology, reflecting its significance in safeguarding digital infrastructure and addressing cybersecurity challenges.
Enacted in 2005, the Right To Information (RTI) Act exempts certain intelligence and security organizations from its purview.
The said exemption includes entities listed in the Second Schedule, with a provision excluding information related to allegations of corruption and human rights violation and the amendment adds CERT-In as the 27th organization exempted under this provision.
The decision to exclude CERT-In from RTI scrutiny has sparked concerns about transparency and accountability, specifically relating to cybersecurity.
As a national nodal agency, the activities of CERT-In are crucial for addressing cyber threats and ensuring the security of critical digital infrastructure.
The decision to exclude it from RTI inquiries shall impact the public’s access to information on cybersecurity incidents, response strategies, and overall governance of digital security.
In New Evidence Law, Courts Prohibited From Inquiring Into Privileged Communication Between Ministers and President of India
The proposed Bharatiya Sakshya (BS) Bill that seeks to replace the Indian Evidence Act of 1872 prohibits the courts from initiating an inquiry into any privileged communication between Ministers and the President of India.
Although Article 74(2) of the Constitution states this, the Union government seeks to give it legal backing by making it part of the evidence book.
The government, however, has not clearly defined what constitutes “privileged communication”, leaving the provision open to interpretation.
The Bill adds the proviso to Section 165, which pertains to the “production of documents” on the orders of a court. “A witness summoned to produce a document shall, if it is in his possession or power, bring it to Court, notwithstanding any objection which there may be to its production or to its admissibility.., Provided that no Court shall require any privilege communication between the Ministers and the President of India to be produced before it,” the Bill states.
The Bill, along with two other criminal codes — the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Bill, 2023 and the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Bill, 2023 — will replace the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898, respectively. They are expected to be tabled in the winter session of Parliament beginning December 4.
The Bills were introduced on August 11 in Parliament and were referred to the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Home Affairs for examination. According to the report finalised by the committee in November, the Bill has omitted four Sections of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, which contain colonial references and other outdated procedures.
The Union Home Secretary highlighted the major changes that have been introduced in the Bill vis-à-vis the Indian Evidence Act, including the deletion of British legacy references.
The words ‘Vakil’, ‘Pleader’ and ‘Barrister’ have been replaced with the word ‘Advocate’, and Section 166 relating to the power of the jury to put forward questions, etc., has been deleted as the jury system has already been abolished in India.
The POCSO Act And Reporting Sexual Crimes Against Minors
The POCSO Act And Reporting Sexual Crimes Against Minors
The case involves a hotel manager accused of not reporting a sexual offense of rape committed with a minor schoolgirl in a hotel, as mandated by the POCSO Act.
Section 19 of the POCSO Act enforces the mandate of reporting sexual offenses against minors by anyone having apprehension or knowledge of a potential, or committed offense.
Section 21 of the POCSO Act penalizes the failure to report crimes against minors prescribing a fine for the failure to report or imprisonment.
Himachal Pradesh High Court’s ruling –
The said case recently raised legal questions concerning the bailability of offences under the Protection Of Children From Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act in the Himachal Pradesh High Court.
It has been ruled by the Himachal Pradesh High Court that failure to report sexual crimes against minors as mandated under section 21 of the POCSO Act is a bailable offense referring to CrPC.
The CrPC Reference –
The High Court justified this by making a reference to the code of criminal procedure, CrPC stating crimes punishable with imprisonment of less than three years are bailable and section 21 of the POCSO Act prescribes punishment for not reporting as imprisonment of six months to a year.
Exemptions –
Children under the POCSO Act are exempted from the liability for failing to report and section 22 of the POCSO Act protects children making false complaints.
Why Has Haryana’s 75% Private Job Reservation Law Been Quashed?
Why Has Haryana’s 75% Private Job Reservation Law Been Quashed?
The Haryana State Employment of Local Candidates Act, 2020 has been declared unconstitutional on November 17 by the Punjab and Haryana High Court.
The law in discussion mandated 75% reservation for Haryana. Reservation for the residents of Haryana in private sector jobs has been considered discriminatory by the court.
The said law was challenged by the Faridabad Industries Association and other Haryana-based associations, asserting that the law violated fundamental rights under the Constitution by promoting ‘sons of the soil’ policy.
The petitioners argued that private sector jobs should be given on merit and skills of a person with employees having the fundamental right to work all over India.
What Was The Quashed Law About?
Passed by the Haryana assembly in November 2020, the Haryana State Employment of Local Candidates Act, 2020 reserves 75% of private sector jobs with a per month salary below Rs.30,000 for the residents of Haryana.
Following the governor’s assent on March 2, 2021, the said law came into effect on January 15, 2022.
The law included various entities such as companies, trust societies, and large individual employees, however, excluded central or state governments.
The Punjab and Haryana High Court’s ruling –
The High Court criticised the law and specifically section 6 and section 8 of the act stating that they amounted to an ‘inspector raj’ that aims to impose undue control on private employers and hence cannot prevail.
Section 6 and section 8 of the act have been considered an infringement on the right to carry on occupation, trade, or business under article 19(1)(g) of the Indian constitution.
Court Declares Sending Stepmother To Old-Age Home Amounts To Domestic Violence
Court Declares Sending Stepmother To Old-Age Home Amounts To Domestic Violence
A dispute between a stepmother and the stepchildren sparks certain clarifications relating to motherhood in Mumbai.
Instead of taking care of the emotions of the 65-year-old stepmother, sending her to an old age home, amounts to emotional abuse, and domestic violence says a magistrate’s court.
All three stepchildren have been refrained by the court from committing any violence against the late father’s second wife.
All three stepchildren have also been directed by the court to pay her monthly maintenance of Rs.7000.
The lawyer of the stepchildren, however, sought to rely on a Supreme Court ruling that held the expression ‘mother’ denotes a natural mother and does not include a stepmother.
Opposing the argument, the magistrate court said that taking into account the definition of domestic relationship provided under the domestic violence act, the stepmother being the wife or the widow of the father of the stepchildren and subjected to domestic violence is the aggrieved person in this case.
What Are Sworn Affidavits And Approver Affidavits?
What Are Sworn Affidavits And Approver Affidavits?
A Sworn Affidavit is a legal document in which a formal statement or declaration is made by a person either before a notary or an officer of the court.
The document serves as an affirmation from the person that certain facts declared and mentioned by the person in the affidavit are true to the best of their knowledge.
What are Approver Affidavits?
The term Approvaer Affidavit although is not a legally recognised term defined in Indian statutes, but is used informally by individuals involved in legal proceedings.
In a legal context, an approver refers to an individual who may have been involved in an offense but later offers cooperation to the prosecution under a barter for pardon or reduced sentence.
Tender of pardon to an accomplice in a crime is provided under section 306 of the criminal procedure code with the condition that the person agrees to disclose the full and true details to the best of their knowledge about the offense.
The NLIU Law Review is the flagship journal of the National Law Institute University, Bhopal.
Call For Papers – NLIU Law Review- VOLUME XIII ISSUE I
ABOUT THE JOURNAL
The NLIU Law Review is the flagship journal of the National Law Institute University, Bhopal. It is a peer-reviewed academic law journal, published biannually by the students of the University. The Law Review aims to promote a culture of scholarly research and academic writing by bringing to the forefront, articles on subjects of interest to the legal profession and academia. As of the year 2023, the Law Review has completed thirteen successful years, with nineteen editions in publication. The Journal has been successfully recognised by, and indexed on several databases including Manupatra, SCC and HeinOnline.
NLIU Law Review is now accepting submissions of manuscripts for publication in Volume XIII Issue I of the journal.
THEME
The NLIU Law Review does not restrict itself to any particular area of law and welcomes contributions from all branches of law, as long as the work is relevant, up to date and original.
GUIDELINES FOR AUTHORS
Types of Submissions accepted by the NLIU Law Review:
Manuscripts on any topic of contemporary legal relevance meeting the below-mentioned criteria:
Articles: 4,000-10,000 words
Case Notes: 2,000-5,000 words
Legislative Comments: 1,000-3,000 words
Book Reviews: 1,000-3,000 words
The word limit is exclusive of the abstract and the footnotes.
General Submission Guidelines:
Manuscripts submitted to the journal must not be co-authored by more than two persons.
Manuscripts must include an abstract of 250-300 words. The abstract must highlight the structure and the essence of the manuscript.
All submissions must be in .docx format. They must be word-processed and compatible with Microsoft Word 2007 or above.
The manuscript should not contain any information that can be used to identify the author.
Manuscripts not in conformity with the Submission Guidelines may be rejected at the sole discretion of the Editorial Board. The Editorial Board reserves the right to send the manuscripts back to the authors for any modification(s) at any stage, in the event of non-conformity with any of the submission guidelines.
Citation Standards:
Citations must strictly conform to the standards laid down in the Oxford University Standard for Citation of Legal Authorities (4th ed., 2012).
Submissions must use only footnotes as a form of citation.
Speaking or substantive footnotes are highly discouraged.
After A Breakup Who Gets The Custody Of The Frozen Embryos?
Frozen embryos can be the answer to the couples, trying to conceive using artificial reproductive technology to obtain a biological child but this perceived boon may also turn into a bane, if and when the couple falls apart and aims for a divorce or a separation.
What Is Embryo Freezing?
The process of embryo feezing is medically assisted and involves in vitro fertilization which is a procedure through which eggs from a women’s ovaries are removed and combined with the sperm of a man in a laboratory to form embryos.
What Is An Embryo?
An embryo is an inceptive/early stage of developement of a multicellular organism.
Who Gets The Custody Of The Frozen Embryos?
Before beginning the vitro fertilisation procedure, your doctor may have had you and your spouse enter into an agreement that specifies what would happen to any frozen embryos if you would want to opt for a divorce in the future.
While signing the contract as a happy couple, you may have not realised that the contract signed by you is legally binding and comes with certain consequences if you weren’t on the same page as your spouse later on.
Apart from disagreements and other issues, there could be issues more complex if either spouse due to a medical condition for example a cancer treatment has become infertile and frozen embryos are the only hope and chance for him/her to have a biological child but one of the spouse does not wishes to have a child or maybe another child with the spouse they are wanting to end up with.
The opposition from the spouse could also be due to unwanted parental rights and responsibilities such as hooked up with providing child support.
Who really gets the custody of the frozen embryos totally depends on the circumstances of each case. But usually when the embryos are created a written contract is entered into between a husband and a wife that sets out the custody terms. if there has been no pre-existing agreement or absence of state law, then the decision is likely to be made by a court judge. However, in some states the said contract can be superseded by state law.
Recently, the case of actress Sophia Vergara and her ex-husband Nick Loeb who approached the court over the use of frozen pre-embryos could be seen. The couple while taking divorce had previously agreed to obtain a written consent from the other before using the pre-embryos. However, when the actress’s husband Nick wanted the embryos to be implanted into a surrogate without the consent of Sophia, the court sided with Sophia Vergara. The court stopped the Husband from using the embryos without the consent of his wife in accordance with the former agreement entered into by the couple.
Forum Shopping And The Supreme Court of India's Stand
Forum shopping or another term associated with it which is “bench hunting” is a legal term that refers to choices made deliberately by lawyers or litigants to bring their case before a particular court or judge aiming to obtain a more favourable outcome in their case.
Lawyers who anticipate particular forums to be appropriate for a particular case for example the Supreme Court of India in a certain case to gain greater visibility through avenues such as a PIL strategically try their matter to be addressed before such particular bench or judges, attempts of which have generally been disapproved as opting for specific judges or benches are not supported.
The Supreme Court of India’s Stand-
The Supreme Court of India too has denounced any form of forum shopping in India as its practice is not in alignment with the integrity of the judicial system.
In Vijay Kumar Ghai vs. State of W.B it was described by the SC that forum shopping is a disreputable practice that does not have any legal sanction and paramountcy. The respondent, in this case, was criticized by the SC for filing multiple complaints in different courts that indicated a malicious intent on behalf of the respondent to harass the petitioners by building pressure on them to settle for the case.
Countries like USA and UK too employ measures to prevent any attempts of forum shopping.
Forum shopping is widely criticized and turned down by imposing hefty fines that may go up to one lakh rupees for practising the same. The courts are mainly of the view that such practices undermine and disrupt judicial fairness with imposing additional burdens on courts opted specifically.
This website uses cookies to improve your experience. We'll assume you're ok with this, but you can opt-out if you wish. Cookie settingsACCEPT
Privacy & Cookies Policy
Privacy Overview
This website uses cookies to improve your experience while you navigate through the website. Out of these cookies, the cookies that are categorized as necessary are stored on your browser as they are essential for the working of basic functionalities of the website. We also use third-party cookies that help us analyze and understand how you use this website. These cookies will be stored in your browser only with your consent. You also have the option to opt-out of these cookies. But opting out of some of these cookies may have an effect on your browsing experience.
Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly. This category only includes cookies that ensures basic functionalities and security features of the website. These cookies do not store any personal information.
Any cookies that may not be particularly necessary for the website to function and is used specifically to collect user personal data via analytics, ads, other embedded contents are termed as non-necessary cookies. It is mandatory to procure user consent prior to running these cookies on your website.
