Date: Fri, 18 May 2007 16:34

From: Jason Neyers

Subject: OBG again - a question

If the beating was a crime, I don't see why not.

I think that my disagreement with Roderick would be that I don't see the economic torts as having any special mission to control competition, in fact I think the judges have disclaimed that proposition. Their only mission is to do justice between the parties, just like the rest of the law of obligations.

Rod wrote

Rob, I think, asked why causing emotional distress or physical discomfort by the use of unlawful means shouldn't be actionable. Surely the answer might be that the law is only interested in regulating the weapons used in fights of a certain severity. I can't see any great enthusiasm for making it a tort by D to C for D to threaten T with violence unless T calls C distressing names - a threat T cravenly complies with! T, no doubt, ought to be able to complain. But a tort to C?

I wonder what other list members think, offlist if preferred. If I beat up children with the intention of causing their parents distress, should the parents have a personal claim for their loss? Does anyone know of a relevant case? (I take it as given that the intentional infliction of distress is not in itself actionable. I intentionally inflict misery on students all the time.)

--
Jason Neyers
January Term Director
Associate Professor of Law
Faculty of Law
University of Western Ontario
N6A 3K7
(519) 661-2111 x. 88435

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