Contract vs tort
The classic 19th century definition of a contract is 'a promise or set of promises which the law will enforce' (Pollock, Principles of Contract 13th edition). That is to say, there is reciprocity of undertaking passing between the promisor and the promisee.
Tort, on the other hand, is generic in nature and therefore more difficult to define. It is a collection of civil law remedies entitling a person to recover damages for loss and injury which have been caused by the actions, omissions or statements of another person in such circumstances that the latter was in breach of a duty or obligation imposed at law.
In contract, the rights and obligations are created by the acts of agreement between the parties to the contractual arrangement.
In tort, the rights and obligations are created by the courts applying common law, which has, on the basis of previous authority fallen into three distinct categories:
Historically, actions in contract and in tort derived from the same source - trespass - compared with actions for breach of a deed, which were based upon an action on the covenant. Actions for breach of contract were based on assumpsit and actions in tort were ex delicto. In the 17th century the courts began to draw procedural but not substantive distinctions between assumpsit and actions ex delicto.
These distinctions became substantive differences during the nineteenth century, reflecting the political social and economical philosophy of 'laissez-faire', which emphasised the importance of the legal doctrines of freedom of contract and sanctity of contract.
The area of tort which recently has been most exhaustively considered by the courts is negligence.
In a lecture to the Technology & Construction Bar Association and the Society of Construction Law on 30th October 2014, Lord Justice Jackson described the difference as: “The law of tort or delict requires D (defendant) to refrain from injuring C’s (claimant) person or property, alternatively to compensate C for any injury or loss caused. The law of contract requires D to fulfil his promises to C or, in default, to make compensation.” Ref https://www.scl.org.uk/sites/default/files/Concurrent%20Liability_0.pdf
[edit] Related articles on Designing Buildings Wiki
- Alternative dispute resolution.
- Adjudication.
- Arbitration.
- Breach of contract.
- Causes of construction disputes.
- Construction contract.
- Contract negotiation.
- Delict.
- Derogation from grant.
- Dispute resolution boards.
- Donoghue v Stevenson.
- Mediation.
- Modifying clauses in standard forms of contract.
- Negligence.
- Procurement
- Scheme for Construction Contracts.
- Strict liability.
- Trespass.
Featured articles and news
Designing sustainability and performance into buildings
Specifying and selecting sustainable resilient timber products.
Modifying wood to improve resistance to decay and movement.
A last minute, long look for built environment professionals.
The architecture of creative reuse. Book review.
Installing solar panels on listed structures.
Sustainable development global goals, history in progress?
"Unless we act now, the 2030 Agenda will become an epitaph for a world that might have been."
Mike Kagioglou FCIOB named CIOB President
'Sustainable Development Goals must be focus for construction'
BSRIA training; a look at what's on offer
From energy management to compliance training.
TESP video warns to beware of rogue trainers.
Highlighting the slippery tactics of non-approved providers.
New Building Safety Wiki launched
Boosting awareness and understanding of the new fire safety regime.
New playbook on AI in construction published by CIOB
How to get to grips with, and the best from AI.
Digital Construction Report NBS
BIM, cloud, off-site, immersive tech, AI, twins and sustainability.
ECA learning zone and industry focus video series
From updates and amendments to circular economy, emergency lighting and much more.