What’s It Price? A Look At The Sorts Of Damages In Tort Regulation – Litigation, Mediation & Arbitration

Waiver Of Tort Is Dead, Long Live Waiver Of Tort! - Corporate/Commercial Law


What is it worth A look at the types of harm in tort law

April 25, 2020

McLennan Ross LLP

To print this article, all you need to do is be registered or log in to Mondaq.com.

Before going to court, you should know what relief you want
Court to give you. Courts can award a variety of damages, or
financial redress for a party who has been wronged. The damage a
The court is awarded differently depending on the applicable legal area. This
The article focuses on the harm that a party could suffer in a tort
Argument. For the types of damages you can get in contract law,
Please read our previous blog post

Damage in tort

According to tort law, damage should be returned to the injured party
Position in which it was before the defendant was wronged. Two kinds of
Damage that often occurs in criminal cases is compensatory and
non-compensating damage.

However, in order to receive damages, the plaintiff still needs to have
to prove that their injuries weren't too far away, caused by
the conduct of the accused and should not be based on a
Mitigate failure.


Courts grant plaintiffs damages as compensation for
Damage suffered by the plaintiff. Compensation losses often fall into
two sub-categories: general and special damage.

  • General

    General Damage Compensates a plaintiff for non-monetary aspects of
    their loss, like pain and suffering. For example, if it is John
    Heck and sustaining injuries, he is entitled to damages as a
    Result. Courts calculate its damage with reference to previous,
    similar case law. When other plaintiffs received $ 50,000 for injuries
    like John's, John will likely get too
    $ 50,000.

  • Special

    Special damages compensate a plaintiff for financial aspects of
    her loss. The easiest way to understand this damage is to
    Think of out-of-pocket expenses
    Result of the illegal act. For example, let's say John has to do this
    Pay the cost out of pocket for pain medication or upfront
    Massage therapy or maybe renting a car. John is too
    entitled to compensate for these financial losses he incurred as a result of

Non-compensatory damage

Courts can also award non-compensatory damages, such as
Punitive, aggravated and nominal damages.

  • punishment

    Courts award punitive damages if one party has committed outrageous
    Behavior that the court seeks to punish and deter. For example,
    In one case, an insurance company tried to avoid: a
    Family house that burned down claiming the family
    Arson committed. In this case, the Supreme Court of Canada ruled
    that high punitive damages were justified.

    Courts only award punitive damages in extreme circumstances
    when the defendant's behavior was particularly shocking. If
    Compensation will deter the defendant's injustice
    Behavior, punitive damages are not appropriate.

  • Aggravated damage:
    Courts grant increased damages if the
    The behavior of the defendant caused the plaintiff in particular
    Distress, grief, or humiliation. So there are aggravated damages
    easily confused with punitive damages, but the two serve differently
    Purposes. Punitive damages punish a malefactor as it intensifies
    Compensation for damages compensates a plaintiff. In some cases, a defendant
    Arrogant and unfriendly behavior can justify serious damage
    Fall below punitive damages.
  • Nominal damage:
    Courts will award small "nominal" damages
    Award if the defendant only slightly violates the
    The plaintiff could not prove the rights of the plaintiff
    meaningful loss, or not mitigating the plaintiff.

    For example, if Carrie had hit Alice, Carrie would have done it
    committed the illicit act of the battery (and the offense of
    Attack). Alice could sue Carrie for tort and seek damages. But if
    Alice did not suffer any serious injury, she could only receive
    nominal damage.

    Let's say Nick is spreading rumors about his business
    Competitor Olivia, and she sued him for defamation. Even though
    Nick defamed her when Olivia can't prove the rumor was caused
    If she suffers a loss, she may only receive nominal compensation.

When could courts reject an injured plaintiff?

Even if a plaintiff has suffered an injury, the court can deny it
Damage that turns out to be too far away was not caused by the
Conduct of the defendant or about which the plaintiff has not taken action

  • Remoteness:
    Sometimes the link is between a plaintiff
    Injury and behavior of the accused is too far away. in the
    in these situations, to order the defendant to pay the plaintiff
    Damage would not be fair as the injury was to the plaintiff
    not reasonably foreseeable.

    For example, in one case a man found a dead fly in a water bottle
    and developed major depression as a result. He sued them
    Water supplier in illegal act. The Supreme Court of Canada found that
    although the supplier was negligent, the damage is to the plaintiff
    were too remote as it was not reasonably foreseeable that someone would
    Anyone who saw a dead fly in his water bottle would suffer so badly
    Reaction. The court therefore refused to grant the plaintiff

  • Root cause:
    Even if a claimant has suffered harm, he still has to do so
    prove that the defendant caused this damage. Courts in general
    Use the "but for" test: but for that of the defendant
    Conduct, would the plaintiff have suffered the injury? The
    The claimant must demonstrate the balance of probabilities (51%)
    Certainty or more) that the defendant caused the loss.

    For example, let's say Mike hired a contractor to do the renovation
    his house. The roof collapsed during the construction process. When
    He's suing the contractor, Mike has to prove it, but for that
    The roof would not have collapsed if the contractor had acted
    On the other hand, the contractor was able to show that the roof was not there
    strong enough to withstand the average winter snow load. This
    Evidence could convince the court that the snow load and not the
    Contractor, collapsed the roof.

    In this case the court would refuse to hold the contractor
    responsible and deny mike damage.

  • Reduction:
    Even if the court finds that a plaintiff was right,
    and the defendant owes them damages, the plaintiff must mitigate
    their damage. This means that the plaintiff must keep his losses as
    minimal as possible.

    For example, if Rose is a doctor botching Liam's operation,
    and Liam endures pain and suffering, he can sue Rose
    for the unlawful act of medical misconduct. But let's say Liam
    could have relieved his pain if he had attended massages regularly and
    Physical therapy. The court could reduce Liam's damages because
    he couldn't mitigate. If treatments could have relieved his pain
    Overall, the court could only award Liam nominal damages.
    To protect his interests and his right to full recovery,
    Liam needs to really mitigate what he suffered.


If you've suffered an injury, there are a variety of searches to choose from
Compensation and other legal remedies from the court. Consider speaking to a
Attorney about your duty to mitigate and how you can restore the full
Amount of damage to which you are entitled.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general overview
Guide to the subject. Expert advice should be obtained
about your particular circumstances.

POPULAR ARTICLES ON: Litigation, Mediation, and Arbitration from Canada