Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 15:47:11 -0400

From: Patrice Deslauriers

Subject: Battery and consequential emotional distress

Bonjour

Not quite what you asked for, but close.

In 1996, in a Civil Law case (Augustus v. Gosset), the Supreme Court of Canada seems to have considered that the publicity of the event (Mrs Augustus' son was killed by a white policeman) was one of many factors to consider in the evaluation of her «solatium doloris».

The Court wrote:

«In the case at bar, there is extensive evidence of the grief caused to the appellant by the death of her only surviving child, exacerbated by the facts that, in 1983, she experienced the death of a little girl who had been born very sick and, that, at her age, she cannot hope to have other children owing. Despite her son's trouble with the law and the fact that he had neither a diploma nor known employment, the trial judge considered that the appellant had nevertheless done everything she could to support and educate him when he was living with her. In addition, owing to the unforeseeable circumstances of Anthony's death, the appellant was unprepared for her ensuing grief. I would also add that the extensive publicity given to the unfortunate facts at the root of this case certainly did not make it easier for the appellant to resume a normal life. Although I recognize that it is impossible out of context to appraise the feelings resulting from the irreparable circumstance of the death of one's own child, it is my view that an award in the order of $25,000 might be fair and reasonable in the circumstances of this case; that being said, it remains to the Court of Appeal to fix the quantum, after hearing the parties on this point.» (par 51)

Regards to everyone,

Patrice Deslauriers

Professeur titulaire
Université de Montréal
Faculté de droit
3101 Chemin de la Tour
Montréal,Qc
H3C 3J7
514-343-7466

-----Message d'origine-----
Envoyé : 19 août, 2004 14:38
À : 'Jason Neyers'
Objet : ODG: Battery and consequential emotional distress

Apparently the victim of Kobe Bryant's alleged attack is suing now in civil court for battery and claiming as part of her damages the distress associated with being at the center of the media storm surrounding the case.

Assuming she prevails on the underlying battery claim, I have no idea whether this sort of consequential damage is compensable in American law.

How would other common law systems treat this damage claim arising from an intentional tort?

<<<< Previous Message  ~  Index  ~  Next Message >>>>>