Discharge of Torts

The term “discharge of torts” refers to the termination or resolution of a tortious claim or legal action. It signifies that the legal liability associated with a tort has been extinguished or ended. When a tort is discharged, the party who committed the wrongful act is no longer held legally responsible for their actions and the injured party loses the right to seek further remedies or damages for the tort. 

Discharge of Torts

There are seven methods through which torts can be discharged and in these instances, no remedy can be sought for the tortious act. The following are the modes of discharge of torts:

• Death of the parties
• Accord and satisfaction
• Release
• Judgment
• Law of limitation
• Waiver
• Acquiesce

These methods serve as ways to discharge torts and terminate the liability of the wrongdoer in tort law.

Death of the parties

The maxim “actio personalis moritur cum persona” holds significant importance, signifying that when a person dies, their personal right of action also dies with them.

The maxim “actio personalis moritur cum persona” is a crucial principle, indicating that if either the person who commits a tort or the person against whom the tort is committed passes away, the personal right or the right to seek damages or take legal action ceases to exist.

There are two scenarios in which this maxim applies:

Death of the person against whom the tort was committed (i.e., the plaintiff)

When the individual against whom the tort was committed approaches the court and files a case but subsequently dies, their personal right of action also perishes.

Illustration:

Suppose A initiates legal proceedings against B for a tortious act. If A passes away during the ongoing trial while the case is still pending before the court, the tort is discharged as A’s right of action ceases to exist.

Exceptions to the maxim of “actio personalis moritur cum persona” with respect to the plaintiff:

In India, there are certain laws that provide exceptions to the aforementioned maxim, such as:

The Legal Representative Suits Act, 1885: Under this Act, the legal representative or executor of a deceased person can represent them in a court of law.

Illustration:

If A dies during the trial proceedings, their legal heir or representative can represent them in the court of law.

Similarly, different laws and acts like the Fatal Accidents Act, the Indian Succession Act and the Workmen’s Compensation Act allow the representative of the plaintiff to act on their behalf in a court of law.

Death of the person who commits the tort (i.e., the defendant)

When the person responsible for committing a tort against another individual dies, the tort is discharged.

Illustration:

If Ram commits a tortious act against Geeta and Geeta files a complaint against Ram, but Ram passes away during the trial, his right of action also dies with him, resulting in the discharge of the tort.

In the case of Prusti v. Mohanty:

In this particular case, the defendant obtained a sum of money through misrepresentation but subsequently died. The High Court of Orissa ruled that when a money decree is issued against an individual in relation to an amount received from the decree-holder through misrepresentation, the liability remains personal and cannot be extended to the defendant’s son under the law. Thus, any claims the decree-holder has against the father are terminated upon the father’s death.

Exceptions to the maxim of “actio personalis moritur cum persona” with respect to the defendant:

In India, various laws provide exceptions to the maxim, such as:

The Legal Representative Suits Act, 1885: 

Under this act, if a person involved in a tortious act dies during the trial, the right of action passes to their legal representative.

Illustration:

If A committed a trespass against B in the past and A dies, with proof of liability for damaging B’s property, the damages for the harm caused to B’s property must be paid by A’s legal representative.

Similarly, different laws and acts like the Fatal Accidents Act, the Indian Succession Act and the Workmen’s Compensation Act require the representative of the defendant to act on their behalf in a court of law.

Accord and Satisfaction

The concept of accord refers to an agreement between the parties involved in a tort, namely the person who commits the tort and the person against whom the tort is committed, to settle their dispute. This agreement is known as an accord. In essence, it involves resolving the issue by accepting some form of consideration in exchange for the right of action.

Satisfaction, on the other hand, entails the actual payment of the agreed consideration by both parties involved in the tort, i.e., the person who committed the tort and the one against whom it was committed.

Once both accord and satisfaction have been fully carried out, the tort is discharged and the dispute no longer proceeds in a court of law.

Illustration:

For instance, if A tragically dies as a result of an injury caused by B’s car, A’s family may come to an agreement with B whereby B agrees to compensate them with Rs. 1,50,000. This situation represents an accord. When A’s family actually receives the payment of Rs. 1,50,000 from B, this represents satisfaction. By settling the matter and accepting the agreed consideration, A’s family forfeits their right of action and the tortious act is discharged.

The only condition for accord and satisfaction is that the consent of the parties involved must be free and not obtained through fraud, coercion or undue influence.

Illustration:

If A, the son of a wealthy businessman, violently assaults one of his servants (trespass to the body) and tries to coerce the servant into entering into an accord through undue influence, the servant’s consent obtained under such influence would not be considered free, rendering the accord and satisfaction invalid.

Release

The release refers to giving up the right to take legal action. It occurs when a person voluntarily discharges the tort and this right is only available to the individual against whom the wrong has been committed.

Illustration:

Situation 1: If B commits a tortious act against A and A willingly chooses to release B from liability, they have the option to do so.

Situation 2: If both B and C commit tortious acts against A and A chooses to release B from liability, it does not mean that C is also released from their liability.

The release must be voluntary and based on the free consent of the injured party. If the consent is obtained through coercion, undue influence or any other unlawful means, such a release should not be considered valid and the tort is not discharged.

Illustration:

For instance, if a police inspector, leveraging their position and using threats, obtains the consent of the injured person to release themselves from liability, that release is not considered valid.

Judgement

In this method, the discharge of tort occurs through a court judgment. Once the court delivers a judgment on a matter, the tort is discharged and no further appeal can be made for the same tort in a court of law.

This method is based on the legal principle of Res Judicata, which means that if the court has already decided a cause of action, the same cause of action should not be entertained by the court again.

Illustration:

If A obtains a remedy against B for a previous accident through a court judgment and later discovers the need for further medical treatment, they cannot claim another remedy for the same accident in a court of law.

In the case of Fitter v. Veal (1701 12 Mod. Rep. 542):

In this case, the plaintiff filed a case against the defendant, seeking damages for assault. Eventually, the plaintiff received a remedy from the defendant as determined by the court. Later, the plaintiff realised the need for additional surgeries and filed another petition seeking further remedy for the same assault in court.

The court rejected the petition, stating that once the court delivers a judgment on a matter, no further appeal can be filed for the same tort in a court of law as the tort is discharged.

Exceptions

There are exceptions to the general rule of judgment as a discharge of tort:

If the petition involves the same parties but seeks a different remedy or addresses the violation of a separate right, then the petition may be allowed.

In the case of Brunsden v. Humphrey:

The plaintiff, a cab driver, had already received compensation for damage to their cab. However, they later discovered that they had suffered a hand fracture due to the accident. They had the right to seek a remedy for the trespass to their body.

If the person who was previously liable for the tort commits the same act again, it is considered a fresh case and can be pursued.

Illustration:

If A commits a trespass against B and is held liable by the court. If A commits the same offence against B again and argues that they cannot be punished twice for the same offence, the defence is not valid because it is considered a separate case.

By Waiver

The next method of discharging a tort is through the waiver. Waiver occurs when a person has multiple available remedies and must choose one of them. They cannot seek both remedies simultaneously, except in the case of defamation and assault.

Illustration:

If A files a case against B for committing a tort against A and A has the right to pursue multiple remedies, they must select one remedy. For instance, if A has a remedy under both tort law and contract law, they must choose one.

The key principles underlying the doctrine of waiver are:

1. The person must choose one remedy. If the chosen remedy fails, the court does not allow them to revert to an alternative remedy.

Illustration:

If A files a case against Z and has two available remedies to pursue in court, if A chooses the first remedy and loses the case, they cannot approach the court for the alternative remedy.

2. The waiver can be either implied or expressed. In the express waiver, the person explicitly communicates their choice in a court of law.

Illustration:

If A files a case and has remedies available under both contract and tort law, when asked by the court, A must clearly communicate their choice.

3. In the implied form of waiver, the person’s choice is implied by their actions or conduct.

Illustration:

If A has two available remedies, one under contract law and one under tort law and they choose to pursue the contract remedy, it is implied that they have elected the contract remedy.

Acquiescence

In this method, the tort is discharged due to the plaintiff’s own incapacity, such as lack of time to go to court, inability to afford court fees or any other incapacity. When a person entitled to enforce their right fails to do so for an extended period, it implies a waiver of the other party’s liability.

Illustration:

If A is entitled to enforce their right against B but neglects to do so for a significant period, it automatically waives B from their liability.

Law of Limitation

Under this method, the tort is discharged due to the expiration of the prescribed time limit for filing a case. Once the time limit has passed, no person is entitled to enforce their right.

For example, in cases of false imprisonment or libel, the time limit to file a case is one year. In cases of trespass to immovable property, the limit is three years. After the time limit has elapsed, no person can enforce their right.

Illustration:

If B commits a tort of trespass to A’s property and A fails to file a case within three years in the court of law, they lose their right to apply due to the limitation period.

Consequences of Discharge of Torts

The discharge of torts has several important consequences that impact both the parties involved and the legal system as a whole. Let’s explore some of these consequences:

Termination of Legal Liability

When a tort is discharged, it signifies the termination of legal liability for the party who committed the wrongful act. The discharged party is no longer held legally responsible for their actions and the injured party loses the right to seek further remedies or damages for the tort.

Closure and Finality

Discharging a tort brings closure to the legal dispute. It allows the parties involved to move on from the incident and avoid prolonged litigation or ongoing legal battles. Discharge promotes finality, as the matter is resolved and the parties can focus on other aspects of their lives.

Preservation of Judicial Resources

By discharging a tort, the legal system is relieved of the burden of continued litigation. It allows courts to allocate their limited resources to other cases and prioritize new disputes. Discharge helps ensure the efficient functioning of the legal system.

Limitation of Remedies

Once a tort is discharged, the injured party loses the right to seek further remedies. This limitation prevents the injured party from continuously pursuing legal actions against the wrongdoer and promotes the principle of finality in legal proceedings.

Impact on Precedent: Discharge of a tort can have implications for legal precedent. Court decisions and judgments related to discharged torts may shape the interpretation and application of the law in future cases. These precedents guide legal professionals and help establish consistent legal principles.

Deterrence and Compliance: 

Discharge of torts can serve as a deterrent, encouraging individuals to abide by legal norms and avoid engaging in wrongful acts. Knowing that their liability can be discharged provides an incentive for individuals to act in accordance with the law and avoid potential legal consequences.

Protection of Rights

Discharge of a tort ensures that the legal rights and obligations of both parties are respected. It upholds the principles of fairness, justice and the rule of law. By discharging a tort, the legal system acknowledges that the appropriate remedies have been sought and that the rights of both parties have been considered.

Conclusion

Discharge of torts can be done on the death of the parties, accord and satisfaction, release, judgment, waiver, acquiescence and the law of limitation. The consequences of discharging torts include the termination of legal liability, closure and finality of the legal dispute, preservation of judicial resources, limitation of remedies, impact on legal precedent, deterrence and compliance and the protection of rights.