Characteristics of a tort of Trespass
1. Actionable per se- No injury Is required
2. Direct result/Impact- Must be a direct result of a voluntary act(only
liable if the injury is brought upon by Your action)
3. Burden of proof-Once you can show Trespass the burden shift to
defendant to prove it wasn’t intentional. If you weren't negligent and it
wasn’t intentional you are not liable
4. Voluntary act- Act must be voluntary
5. Intention- If it can be shown that the act was intentional or it was
"substantially certain" to have consequences then no matter the
likelihood of it, You will be found guilty.
Types Of Trespass
1. Trespass to a person(Trespass vi et armis)
• One of the older Torts
• Does not require violence or weapons because of bodily integrity
• Made up of tort of assault, Battery and False imprisonment
2. Trespass to Land(Trespass quare clausum fregit)
3. Trespass to Goods and Chattels(Trespass de bonis asportatis)
Right to a Jury
Section 1(1)of the Courts Act 1988 removed the right to a jury in negligence
actions apart from False imprisonment and cases of vie et armis. Otherwise the
jurors would be too sympathetic and give out excess remedies.
Case: Sheridon v Kelly and another(2006): Section 1(3)(b) Courts Act 1988-
Damages consistent with above exemptions have the right to a jury even if
another Tort suit is joint with the damages claimed.
Trespass Actions and the PIAB
Must go to PIAB first and they will more than likely transfer you to a court to
be heard.
1. Vie et Armis( Trespass to a person)
Assault
, • An act that placed another person in reasonable apprehension of an
immediate battery being commited upon him however words alone
cannot constitute and assault.
Dullaghan v Hillen [1957] Ir Jur Rep 10
Battery
• Direct application of Physical contact upon the person of another
without their consent, express( Sexual contact and medical treatments
or implied( everyday life like walking In a crowd or sport).
Wilson V Pringle(1987)
Contributory negligence and Trespass actions
Section 34(1) of the Civil Liability Act 1961 implies to reduce damages awarded
to Plaintiff where they acted unreasonable in a manner that contributed to
their own injuries( Trespass actions and Negligence actions)
Gammell v Doyle(t/a Lees Public House) & Anor 2009-In notes
False Imprisonment
• The unlawful and total restraint of the personal liberty of another
against his will(Law only requires that the victim cannot escape
confinement).
• There is no need for injury or suffer humiliation to be illegal.
• Simple surveillance on the other hand will not constitute false
imprisonment.
• Imprisonment may be physical and psychological
• The victim does not need to be aware of confinement. Only to restrict
the victims freedom of movement in every direction( limits to small
building and lavatory but would be unreasonable to extend to a country.
Phillips v GN Ry Co LTD(1903)
Murray V Minister of Defence(1988) 1 WRL 692
2. The Tort of the intentional infliction of emotional
suffering
• Developed in the 19th century but hadn't been developed.(Not
substantial in Irish courts but can be dealt with in vie et armis).
• Originated in the case Wilkinson V Downtown(1897).
• Most significant development was in a case OPO and another v Rhodes.
Following this case they found that the Tort had not been made out.
3. Trespass de bonis asportatis(Trespass to chattels)
1. Actionable per se- No injury Is required
2. Direct result/Impact- Must be a direct result of a voluntary act(only
liable if the injury is brought upon by Your action)
3. Burden of proof-Once you can show Trespass the burden shift to
defendant to prove it wasn’t intentional. If you weren't negligent and it
wasn’t intentional you are not liable
4. Voluntary act- Act must be voluntary
5. Intention- If it can be shown that the act was intentional or it was
"substantially certain" to have consequences then no matter the
likelihood of it, You will be found guilty.
Types Of Trespass
1. Trespass to a person(Trespass vi et armis)
• One of the older Torts
• Does not require violence or weapons because of bodily integrity
• Made up of tort of assault, Battery and False imprisonment
2. Trespass to Land(Trespass quare clausum fregit)
3. Trespass to Goods and Chattels(Trespass de bonis asportatis)
Right to a Jury
Section 1(1)of the Courts Act 1988 removed the right to a jury in negligence
actions apart from False imprisonment and cases of vie et armis. Otherwise the
jurors would be too sympathetic and give out excess remedies.
Case: Sheridon v Kelly and another(2006): Section 1(3)(b) Courts Act 1988-
Damages consistent with above exemptions have the right to a jury even if
another Tort suit is joint with the damages claimed.
Trespass Actions and the PIAB
Must go to PIAB first and they will more than likely transfer you to a court to
be heard.
1. Vie et Armis( Trespass to a person)
Assault
, • An act that placed another person in reasonable apprehension of an
immediate battery being commited upon him however words alone
cannot constitute and assault.
Dullaghan v Hillen [1957] Ir Jur Rep 10
Battery
• Direct application of Physical contact upon the person of another
without their consent, express( Sexual contact and medical treatments
or implied( everyday life like walking In a crowd or sport).
Wilson V Pringle(1987)
Contributory negligence and Trespass actions
Section 34(1) of the Civil Liability Act 1961 implies to reduce damages awarded
to Plaintiff where they acted unreasonable in a manner that contributed to
their own injuries( Trespass actions and Negligence actions)
Gammell v Doyle(t/a Lees Public House) & Anor 2009-In notes
False Imprisonment
• The unlawful and total restraint of the personal liberty of another
against his will(Law only requires that the victim cannot escape
confinement).
• There is no need for injury or suffer humiliation to be illegal.
• Simple surveillance on the other hand will not constitute false
imprisonment.
• Imprisonment may be physical and psychological
• The victim does not need to be aware of confinement. Only to restrict
the victims freedom of movement in every direction( limits to small
building and lavatory but would be unreasonable to extend to a country.
Phillips v GN Ry Co LTD(1903)
Murray V Minister of Defence(1988) 1 WRL 692
2. The Tort of the intentional infliction of emotional
suffering
• Developed in the 19th century but hadn't been developed.(Not
substantial in Irish courts but can be dealt with in vie et armis).
• Originated in the case Wilkinson V Downtown(1897).
• Most significant development was in a case OPO and another v Rhodes.
Following this case they found that the Tort had not been made out.
3. Trespass de bonis asportatis(Trespass to chattels)
