Torts Ordinance [New Version]

False imprisonment is the complete and unlawful deprivation of a person's liberty for any period of time, by physical means or by the appearance of authority.

In an action for false imprisonment it shall be a defence for the Defendant if —

270 Book of Laws 10 19 Nisan 5728 / 17.04.1968

(Repealed)

[in Real Property]

Trespass to Real Property is the unlawful entry onto Real Property, or the unlawful damage or interference with Real Property by a person; however, a Plaintiff may not recover damages for trespass to Real Property unless he has suffered pecuniary loss thereby.

In an action for trespass to Real Property — the burden of proof lies on the Defendant to show that the act complained of was not unlawful.

[in Chattels]

Trespass to chattels is the unlawful taking of goods from the possession of another person, or the forcible interference with them while in the possession of another person; however, a Plaintiff may not recover damages for trespass to chattels unless he has suffered pecuniary loss thereby.

In an action for trespass to chattels — the burden of proof lies on the Defendant to show that the act complained of was not unlawful.

[Right of Ownership or Possession]

A mistake as to ownership or right of possession, even a bona fide mistake, and also an intention to benefit the true owner, do not justify interference with the property of another; however —

[Trespass]

A claim of right to deal with property or to prevent another person from dealing with it, alone, does not constitute trespass.

(Repealed)

Where a person did an act which a reasonable and prudent person would not have done in the same circumstances, or failed to do an act which a reasonable and prudent person would have done in the same circumstances, or, in a particular profession or trade, did not use the skill or did not exercise the degree of care which a reasonable, prudent and competent person in that profession or trade would have used or exercised in the same circumstances — that constitutes negligence; and if he was negligent as aforesaid in relation to another person towards whom he had, in those circumstances, a duty not to act as he did, that constitutes Negligence, and a person who causes damage to another by his Negligence commits a Tort.

271 Book of Laws 10 19 Nisan 5728 / 17.04.1968

The duty referred to in Section 35 is owed towards every person and towards every owner of property, whenever a reasonable person ought, in the same circumstances, to have foreseen that they are likely in the ordinary course of events to be affected by the act or omission specified in that Section.

[Every Person]

[to Real Property]

In an action for damage where it has been proved that the damage was caused by a dangerous thing, excluding fire or an animal, or by the escape of a thing likely to cause damage upon its escape, and that the Defendant was the owner of the thing, or in charge of it, or was the occupier of the property from which the thing escaped — the burden of proof lies on the Defendant to show that there was no negligence in respect of the dangerous or escaped thing for which he would be liable.

[Burden of Proof in Negligence regarding Dangerous Things]

In an action for damage where it has been proved that the damage was caused by fire or as a result of fire, and that the Defendant ignited the fire or was responsible for the ignition of the fire, or that he is the occupier of the Real Property or the owner of the chattels from which the fire originated — the burden of proof lies on the Defendant to show that there was no negligence in respect of the source or the spread of the fire for which he would be liable.

[Burden of Proof in Negligence Regarding Fire]

In an action brought in respect of damage in which the following two elements have been proved:

the burden of proof lies on the Defendant to show that there was no negligence on his part in respect thereof for which he would be liable.

[Negligence in Respect of an Animal]

In an action brought in respect of damage in which it has been proved that the Plaintiff had no knowledge and had no ability to know what were in fact the circumstances that caused the incident which led to the damage, and that the damage was caused by a property over which the Defendant had full control, and it appears to the court that the occurrence of the incident that caused the damage is more consistent with the conclusion that the Defendant did not exercise reasonable care than with the conclusion that he did exercise reasonable care — the burden of proof lies on the Defendant to show that there was no negligence in respect of the incident that led to the damage for which he would be liable.

Burden of Proof in Negligence Where the Thing Speaks for Itself

A public nuisance is an unlawful act or an omission of a legal duty, where the act or omission endangers the life, safety, health, property or comfort of the public, or constitutes an obstruction to the public in the exercise of any right common to all.

Public Nuisance

43. No action shall be brought in respect of a public nuisance except —

[Public Nuisance]

Private Nuisance

In an action for private nuisance, it shall be a defence that the act complained of was done pursuant to the conditions of a Permit or an agreement that binds the Plaintiff and operates for the benefit of the Defendant.

In an action for private nuisance, it shall not be a defence merely that the nuisance existed before the Plaintiff took possession of or acquired the Real Property in question.

[Others]

The provisions of Sections 42 to 46 are intended to add to and not to derogate from the provisions relating to nuisance established in any other enactment.

A person commits a tort if he prevents, by obstruction or in any other manner, an owner or occupier of Real Property from enjoying a reasonable amount of sunlight, having regard to the situation and character of the Real Property, after the owner or occupier or their predecessors in title have continuously enjoyed such light — otherwise than pursuant to the conditions of a Contract or agreement — for at least fifteen years immediately preceding the obstruction or prevention.

Unlawful Detention

Unlawful detention is the unlawful withholding of movable property from a person who is entitled to possess it immediately.

[Lawful Detention]

In an action brought in respect of unlawful detention, the court may, according to the circumstances, Order the return of the detained property, in addition to any other remedy provided under this Ordinance or in substitution for such remedy.

52. Conversion is where the Defendant unlawfully transfers to his own use movable property the right to possess which belongs to the Plaintiff, by the Defendant taking it, detaining it, destroying it, delivering it to a third party, or otherwise depriving the Plaintiff of it.

In an action brought in respect of conversion, it shall be a defence to the Defendant if he purchased the movable property in good faith in an open market from a person who habitually deals in that market in movable property of the kind of the property alleged to have been converted, or if he purchased it in good faith in a shop where movable property of that kind is habitually sold, from the shopkeeper or his agent.

[Not a Defence]

In an action brought in respect of conversion, the Defendant shall not, for the purpose of his defence, raise, against the person entitled to immediately possess the movable property, the right of a third party.

In an action brought in respect of conversion, the court may, according to the circumstances, Order the return of the converted property, in addition to any other remedy provided under this Ordinance or in substitution for such remedy.

Fraud is a false representation of fact made with knowledge of its falsity or without belief in its truth or recklessly, not caring whether it is true or false, with the intention that the person misled by the representation shall act upon it; however, no action shall be brought in respect of such a representation unless it was intended to deceive the Plaintiff and did in fact deceive him, and the Plaintiff acted upon it and thereby suffered pecuniary damage.

No action shall be brought in respect of a representation as referred to in Section 56 that was made in relation to a person's character, conduct, credit, solvency, trade or occupation, for the purpose of obtaining credit, money or goods for him, unless the representation was in writing signed by the Defendant personally.

[Limitation on Action for a Specific Fraud]

Injurious Falsehood

(Repealed)

Malicious prosecution is the institution or continuation — actually, maliciously, and without reasonable and probable cause — of wrongful proceedings against a person, in criminal proceedings or in Bankruptcy or in winding-up, where the proceedings damaged his credit or reputation or endangered his liberty and terminated in his favour, if the proceedings were capable of so terminating; but no action shall be brought against a person for malicious prosecution merely because he supplied information to a competent authority that instituted the proceedings.

(Repealed)

Unlawful Inducing of Breach of Contract