Private Defences under Law of Torts | Law Optional Notes for UPSC PDF Download

Introduction

• Worldwide legal systems universally acknowledge the importance of the instinct of self-preservation as a fundamental human trait. Many democratic nations acknowledge the use of reasonable force when anticipating a threat of force. In tort law, a defendant can be held responsible for a committed tort if all necessary elements for wrongdoing are present. However, employing "General defences" in tort law allows a defendant to escape liability if their actions align with specific criteria associated with these defenses.
• The legal framework grants individuals the right to use reasonable force to protect their person or property. This right extends beyond personal life, property, and family to encompass the protection of others' lives and property in general. Actions resulting in harm during the exercise of this right are permissible.
• The law permits the use of reasonable force to protect one's movable and immovable property, provided there is an imminent threat and the use of force is the last option to repel an invasion. Reasonable force can only be used when there is a credible threat of force by another person, and employing such force should be justified with valid grounds.
• Justice Donovan, recognizing the law of private defenses, described it as an inherent aspect not explicitly written or learned but ingrained in human nature. The use of reasonable force as a defense is acceptable in a court of law when there is an imminent danger to life and no other valid recourse is available.
• In the case of Bird v. Holbrooke, the defendant installed a spring gun trap in his garden to catch intruders. However, the defendant failed to display any warning signals. The plaintiff, pursuing an escaped bird, mistakenly entered the defendant's garden and suffered injuries from the spring gun trap. The court held the defendant liable for damages due to the lack of adequate notice regarding the trap. The court emphasized that if sufficient notice had been provided after installing the spring gun, no damages would be awarded for injuries caused by its activation.

Meaning of Private Defences under Law of Torts

• Private Defence in the context of Law of Torts is defined by L.B. Curzon as the situation where an individual commits a tort in defense of oneself or one's property, and may not be held liable if the action was reasonable given the circumstances.
• According to Osborn's Concise Law Dictionary, Private Defences under the Law of Torts refer to actions taken in reasonable defense of one's person or property. This defense can be invoked in response to a tort action. It encompasses the right of private defense of one's family and potentially any other individual from unlawful force.

Essentials for Private Defences under Law of Torts

• There must be an immediate threat to personal safety or property, leaving no time to seek help from authorities. It is not justified to use force against someone based on mere speculation of a future attack or for retaliation after an attack has ended.
• Illustrative Example: In the case of Morris v. Nugent, the defendant shot a dog claiming self-defense, but the court ruled against him as the dog was running away, posing no imminent danger.
• The force used must be absolutely necessary to repel the invasion. While self-defense is recognized by law, it should not be abused, and the force used should be proportional and reasonable.
• Force used should be proportional to the urgency of the situation. It should not exceed what is required. The reasonableness of force depends on the specific circumstances of each case.
• Explanation: Reasonable force can be used to protect property when there is a reasonable apprehension of force by another person, without attracting liability. However, valid grounds for using such force must be demonstrated.

Private Defences under Law of Torts

• Definition: Private defences under the Law of Torts do not apply to actions that are not considered offenses. This right can be exercised against any assailant, regardless of their mental state or intentions.
• Scope: The right to private defences is applicable in cases of overt attacks, especially when there is a threat to life or limb. It can be invoked when there are no other reasonable alternatives available to protect oneself.
• Criteria: The key test for invoking private defences is the immediate necessity for self-defense. It must be determined whether the actions taken by the defendant were immediately necessary under the circumstances.
• Examples:
  • If an individual is being physically attacked and has no means of escape, they may use reasonable force to defend themselves.
  • In a situation where there is a clear and imminent danger to life, a person can take necessary actions to prevent harm to themselves or others.

Conclusion

• The right to private defences in the context of the Law of Torts is a crucial legal concept that allows individuals to protect themselves against harm.
• It is important to assess the immediate necessity for self-defense and whether the actions taken were reasonable in the given circumstances.