Ignorance Is Not a Defense in a Court of Law - Essay Example

Draft) Whenever people are living and interacting in a community, there are times when they happen to do things that are injurious to each other in one way or another. Some of these things are usually in an intentional or non-intentional manner. Nonetheless, irrespective of whether an unlawful acts are done intentionally or not, ignorance is usually is not defense in a court of law, the law has to take its course. the concept of law and legal institutions exists so that people can live harmoniously in the society, having the much needed care and concern for their fellow people. The question that most people ask is where this concept of law originated from. There are different kinds of wrongs that people do and their special categorization relates to different modes of judgments and repercussions. One of the kinds of wrongs that are common and need people to be much aware of are torts. In legal terms, torts can be said to unlawful acts or wrongs that are given recognition by law as those standing for a lawsuit. Whenever these wrongs are committed, they result in a form of harm or injury that constitutes full ground for seeking compensation by the party that has suffered the harm. There are some torts which when committed, are categorized as criminal offences and actually call for full imprisonment or stricter approaches. However, the main aim of tort is to ensure that full compensation is done for the damages caused to the victim while at the same time, preventing cases of similar wrongs in future. The person that has suffered harm usually has two alternative approaches whenever he is faced by the situation. First, he may sue the person who caused the harm or inflicted damage to him or on the other hand, he may stop the extension of the tortuous conduct in exchange for monetary benefits. in either of the two ways, the courts have no objection as long as the matter I brought to finality in a amicable manner and the aggrieved party gets due justice satisfactoriy. Among some of the compensation that an affected stands to get in a case of tort include; the loss of capacity to earn, pain and suffering, reasonable and maximum medical expenses. These losses include both present and future expectation, a wrongful act may be committed, out of which the offender may be required to make compensation that may go a long way. The duration for provision of compensation depends on the kind of harm that was inflicted and the magnitude of the damage itself. All this things have to be analysed in a court of law and due judgment passed by competent judges. torts are many and varied, some of the specific examples include trespass, where a person is sued for passing into a territory that he is not supposed to pass, assault, any kind of battery, negligence of duty depending on the context in which it cause injury or harm, products liability as well as emotional infliction of emotional distress. these are not the only types, there are still many more, and the court of law may be in the position to classify a particular offense as constituting a tort or not. There are three general categories of torts; first is intentional torts, just as their names suggests, they are torts that results from a deliberate act of hitting or inflicting of pain to another person. The second category refers to negligence torts, these torts arises from incidents of failure to open stipulated rules of procedure for normal practice thereby causing accidents that are injurious to other people, a good example is where a driver a driver fails to obey the law of traffic and ends up causing an accident and injuring people. The third kind of ort is referred to as strict liability tort, this kind of torts address case of selling of products that are unfit for use to the public. Intentional torts are those that the particular defendant ought to have been aware of their occurrence because of their actions and behavior. when the actions of the defendant are considered to be unreasonably unsafe for other parties, this constitutes negligence torts while for strict liability torts are determined when a particular action causes harm to the other party, it is usually not resulting from the among of carefulness that a defendant observes. It is therefore important to point out that torts are important legal strategies that ensure people co-exist harmoniously. Torts define the manner in which people should involve in different practices and the limits that they can go, knowing that excesses that are injurious to other people are punishable offences in a court of law. Tort is simply one of the many branches that constitute private law; some of the other branches are contract, property law as well as restitution that is also referred to as unjust enrichment. Some people explain that a tort is a legal process that makes an injured person to justify his/her problem as belonging to someone. The injured person has to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the damage that has been suffered is as a result of the mistake of a second party. This is different from a criminal case where the duty of prosecution of the culprit is a mandate of the state. Whereas a criminal case is prosecuted and managed by the state, the victim himself handles same responsibility for the case of tort, where the victim happens to die because of the harm inflicted, the survivors or next of kins can take the responsibility to pursue justice. The other difference between these two issues is that a tort case may not necessarily end up in a punishment or sentence, rather the main purpose of this case is judgment liability. Such kinds of judgment in most cases only require the defendant to provide for the compensation of the victim a sum equal to the damage caused as determined by the court. in principles, the law of tort usually changes all of the plaintiffs recognizable and assessable costs to the defendant during prosecution, this is usually referred to as an award of compensatory damages and is usually given in favor of the plaintiff. At the same time, there are rare cases where the plaintiff in a tort case is given punitive damages. These damages are simply defined as that are offered in excess of compensatory relief. There are other incidents where the plaintiff may be required to obtain an injuction, this is a simply an order from the court which prevents the defendant from causing any other kinds of harm or damage to the plaintiff after judgment has been done. This is usually motivated by the fact that a defendant may feel heavily punished and decide to take revenge on the plaintiff later on after judgment of the case. In case this happens, then the defendant is arrested and prosecuted as a criminal offender, which attracts heavier and severe punishment that the former. The law is always categorical on the kinds of damages that can be sued and punishable in a court of law. Not all kinds of damages and injuries that people experience can be prosecuted in court. For instance, when a person is injured or hurt in the course of participation in game or sport, that does not constitute a tort in as much as the victim has suffered minor or major injuries. The victim may not have to prosecute the culprit or cause him to take of the resulting damages. since the culprit does not have any legal mandate to cause the damage to the victim, he is not considered to have acted tortiously. This is important so that people draw clear differences between tortful acts and other acts that are merely a result of accident in the course of involvement in the action or activity. Tort provides a clear distinction between two main general kinds of responsibilities, i.e, the responsibility of not to injure, “period” responsibilities of not injuring in a manner that is out of negligence, recklessness or intentional. whenever a person participates in an activity that can be regarded as being hazardous, then he is liable to the responsibility of the first sort, that is the obligation of not to cause injury, “period.” on the other hand, when a person participates in an activity or event that is regarded as having ordinary riskiness like driving, then he is liable to the obligation of the second duty, that is, a responsibility of not to cause injury in a manner that is negligent, reckless or intentional. In general, it is important that people understand that their general conduct is governed by strict liability, if it be in breach of the obligation not to cause injury “period.” Alternatively, one’s conduct is preside over by fault liability, if it is found to be in breach of the obligation not to cause injury in a manner that is considered negligent, reckless or intentional. This is the most important part of tort law; everybody has to understand that his or her actions and behavior are important. Read More