First Principles of Business Law

14. A law of 'tort' or 'torts'?

14.1. No general principle of liability for harm wrongfully caused

Once you have worked through the various sections of this module, you may wonder whether all cases of wrongful civil harm can be dealt with by reference to a limited number of general principles. If so, it would be proper to speak of a 'law of tort' in which broad principles give an underlying unity to all the different instances of liability.

The alternative view is that, instead of broad principles, there are certain specific torts for which liability arises, each of which depends on its own principles - a 'law of torts'. This is a distinction with important consequences.

If there were a general law of tort, a person who suffered harm would be able to recover the loss as long as the case fell within established general principles.But if only specified torts are recognised in Australian law, compensation for harm can only be obtained if the case falls within one of the recognised torts.

Currently, much of the law in Australia relates to individual torts, each with its own specialised rules. Australian law has not yet worked out broad principles of liability that would encompass all unjustifiable harm. And there are many types of harm for which tort law does not provide redress. So it is probably more accurate to speak of a 'law of torts' rather than a 'law of tort'.