From: Penelope Watson <penelope.watson@mq.edu.au>
To: Ken Oliphant <Ken.Oliphant@bristol.ac.uk>
CC: John Goldberg <jgoldberg@law.harvard.edu>
obligations@uwo.ca
Date: 09/11/2015 18:12:34 UTC
Subject: Re: Projecting message onto side of another's building: trespass, nuisance, something else?

Sorry, thanks to Ken and John

On Tue, Nov 10, 2015 at 5:11 AM, Penelope Watson <penelope.watson@mq.edu.au> wrote:
Thanks for that post Ken. Would v much appreciate any more you or anyone has on Third Restatement. Am working on Wilkinson v Downton. 
Regards
Penelope

On Tue, Nov 10, 2015 at 4:47 AM, Ken Oliphant <Ken.Oliphant@bristol.ac.uk> wrote:
On 9 November 2015 at 13:36, John Goldberg <jgoldberg@law.harvard.edu> wrote:
<snip> the draft provisions of the Third Restatement of Torts concerning intentional torts to the person are contemplating inclusion of a separate wrong dubbed "Purposeful Infliction of Bodily Harm."  The provision is precisely meant to capture cases of purposeful physical harms not caused by physical contact.    

So, finally catching up with Wilkinson v Downton (1897) then... :)

(Insofar as the scope of that rule was extended beyond mental injury to physical harms not caused by battery.)




--

 
Penelope Watson
Senior Lecturer
 
Macquarie Law School
Building W3A
Macquarie University NSW 2109
 



--

 
Penelope Watson
Senior Lecturer
 
Macquarie Law School
Building W3A
Macquarie University NSW 2109
 
Tel: +61 2 9850 7071
Fax: +61 2 9850 7686