Tort and negligence

This subtopic covers general torts, negligence and nuisance.

For a summary in tabular form of some of the more illustrative decisions in negligence claims (as from 1 January 2020), see Practice Notes:

  1. Negligence claims—illustrative decisions (2025)

  2. Negligence claims—illustrative decisions (2020–2024) [Archived]

What are claims in tort?

Definition and background

The two key and mutually supporting functions of tort law are to:

  1. compensate people when their rights are infringed, and

  2. provide a mechanism for redress, to thereby define and uphold those rights

The courts strive to strike a balance between promoting corrective justice and remedying wrongs on the one hand and not contributing to the creation of an overly litigious society that believes there must be a remedy for every misfortune on the other. In attempting to achieve this, judges consider the balance of risk and responsibility at both an individual and a societal level.

Tort law seeks to provide protection of varying degrees for physical and mental health, personal property and real property (ie land) as well as personal privacy and reputation.

For further guidance on the evolution of tort

To view the latest version of this document and thousands of others like it, sign-in with LexisNexis or register for a free trial.

Powered by Lexis+®
Latest Dispute Resolution News

Withholding DSAR documents from inspection during data protection proceedings by relying on a Data Protection Act 2018 exemption (Cole v Marlborough College)

Information Law analysis: This claim relates to the scope of production and the application of the exemptions to production of personal data in responding fully to a subject access request. The Claimant, Thomas Cole (Cole), who was a student at the Defendant school, Marlborough College (the College), submitted a data subject access request (DSAR) under Article 15 of the United Kingdom General Data Protection Regulation, Assimilated Regulation (EU) 2016/679 (the UK GDPR) after he was removed from the school following his involvement in a physical altercation with another student. In this half-day case management hearing, Mr Justice Nicklin assessed whether the College was entitled to withhold, in whole or part, documents containing Cole’s personal data, rather than providing the material for inspection ahead of a two-day trial on the data protection claim expected to start in mid-2025. The court held that the College was entitled to withhold some documents (containing Cole’s personal data) on the grounds of the exemption in paragraph 16 of Schedule 2, Part 3 to the Data Protection Act 2018 (DPA 2018). In short, this exemption provides that a controller is not obliged to disclose information to a data subject where doing so involves disclosing information that relates to another individual who can be identified from that information, whether as the source of information or as the subject of such information. Written by Robyn Bond, associate at Ropes & Gray International LLP.

View Dispute Resolution by content type :

Popular documents