Hill vs. Bell - Tort Case - Essay Example

Potentially, this case has to be resolved through various legal concepts (especially the doctrines of nuisance and trespass), using various statutes, and case laws. Body Legal Concepts The relevant legal concepts that would be applicable in this case are the doctrine of nuisance and doctrine of negligence that are a part of the English tort laws. Tort is civil wrongs that have to be differentiated from criminal wrongs. A tort remedy would not include damage to the public in general but require action from one citizen who has faced damages due to the act of the owner of the property.

Arising from tort several other civil wrongs arises including battery, trespass, and conversion (The Locke Institute, 2011). According to the Concept of negligence, one person owes a duty of care towards another person and any breach of this duty of care is a liability under tort, and damages have to be paid by the person whose act is negligent. Due to the breach of duty to one person, the other person has to suffer damages, and this act by the other person would likely to be the cause of the duty of care.

However, in this case, since Hill has not suffered significant damages due to the fruits falling into his property, he cannot use the doctrine of negligence. . Some of the common disturbances that may be present include noise pollution, barking dogs, dumping of wastes, constant domestic quarrels, etc. In this case, Bell’s fruits are a constant source of nuisance as they are falling into the property of Hill and are a potential source of damage. The branch has infringed upon Hill’s property and hence Hill can use the Doctrine of Nuisance to claim damages for the falling fruits (North Carolina Bar Association, 2004).

Using the doctrine of nuisance Hill can claim damages in the form of payment of damages or seeking an injunction (Crown Prosecution Service, 2011). In case of damages, Bell has to make do of the loss by payment of any amount that has been lost by Hill from the falling fruits. In case there is a high chance that the infringement act of Bell (for example in this case not cutting the branches) continues, then the court can issue an injunction and provide relief to Hill in the form of ensuring that the tree branches has to be trimmed till the property wall of Hill (British Law, 2011).

Another doctrine that could be used by Hill is the doctrine of trespass is the damages suffered by one or one’s property due to the acts of the defendant that are an infringement to the plaintiff or his property. Under British law, the same has been classified as a trespass to one’s land and could be committed intentionally or accidentally (Crown Prosecution Service, 2011). Relevant statutes As per the statutes of UK, The land owner would be the owner of that particular tree, even if the tree has been grown by somebody else, or the branches or the roots of the tree protrude into the neighbouring property.

Here, if the branches or the