Date: Fri, 18 May 2007 12:34
From: Robert Stevens
Subject: OBG again - a question
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.)
Previous Message ~ Index ~ Next