Causes of Action (20:App G): Difference between revisions

From Clicklaw Wikibooks
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(Created page with "{{LSLAP Manual TOC|expanded = smallclaims}} == Causes of Action == The cause of action is the claimant’s reason for bringing a suit against the defendant. While there mus...")
 
No edit summary
Line 17: Line 17:
#'''Misrepresentation:''' If the other party made a statement to you before the contract came into  existence  that  you  relied  on  in  entering  the  contract  and  that  turned  out  to  be  false, you may be able to have the contract set aside.  
#'''Misrepresentation:''' If the other party made a statement to you before the contract came into  existence  that  you  relied  on  in  entering  the  contract  and  that  turned  out  to  be  false, you may be able to have the contract set aside.  
#'''Frustration:''' frustration occurs when an unforeseen event renders contractual obligations impossible  or  radically  changes  the  primary  purpose  of  the  contract.  Frustration  is  also another complicated area in contract law. Legal advice should be sought.
#'''Frustration:''' frustration occurs when an unforeseen event renders contractual obligations impossible  or  radically  changes  the  primary  purpose  of  the  contract.  Frustration  is  also another complicated area in contract law. Legal advice should be sought.
*'''Breach of Employment Contract (implied terms)''' – The courts cannot enforce statutory rights such as those  found  in  the ''Employment  Standards  Act'',  as  special  adjudicative  bodies  have  been  created  to  rule  on these  types  of  claims  and  have  exclusive  jurisdiction  over  them.    However,  many  parallel  rights  exist  at common  law  and  may  be  enforced  by  the  courts.    At  common law,  employment  contracts  contain numerous  implied  terms  that  are  actionable  through  Small Claims,  such  as  the  requirement  to  give reasonable  notice  or  payment  in  lieu  upon  termination  of  an  employee.    The  fact  that  no  written
*'''Breach of Employment Contract (implied terms)''' – The courts cannot enforce statutory rights such as those  found  in  the ''Employment  Standards  Act'',  as  special  adjudicative  bodies  have  been  created  to  rule  on these  types  of  claims  and  have  exclusive  jurisdiction  over  them.    However,  many  parallel  rights  exist  at common  law  and  may  be  enforced  by  the  courts.    At  common law,  employment  contracts  contain numerous  implied  terms  that  are  actionable  through  Small Claims,  such  as  the  requirement  to  give reasonable  notice  or  payment  in  lieu  upon  termination  of  an  employee.    The  fact  that  no  written employment contract was signed does not disqualify an employee or former employee from claiming for breach of these terms.  See LSLAP Manual [[Chapter 6 – Employment Law]] for more details.
**Defences:  Just cause: If an employer terminates an employee for just cause the employer is not required to give the  terminated  employee  reasonable  notice  or  pay  in  lieu.  The  onus  to  prove  just  cause  is  on  the employer, and the standard is generally hard to meet. See LSLAP Manual Chapter 06—Employment Law for more details. Debt– Debt claims arise where the defendant owes the complainant a specific sum of money, often for a loan or for unpaid goods or services.  There may be some overlap between debt and breach of contract.  oDefences:  As  there  likely  will  be  some  overlap  between  debt  and  breach  of  contract,  see  the defences above under breach of contract.  2) Rare Causes of ActionBreach of Confidence - Breach of confidence occurs when the defendant makes an unauthorized use of information  that  has  a  quality  of  confidence  about  it  and  was  entrusted  to  him/her  by  the  claimant  in circumstances giving rise to an obligation of confidence.  Nuisance–  Nuisance  may  be  private  or  public.    Private  nuisance  is  defined  as  interference  with  a landowner  or  occupier’ s  enjoyment  of  his/her  land  that  is  both  substantial  and  unreasonable.    It  can include obnoxious sounds or smells or escaping substances, but does not usually arise from the defendant’ s normal use of their own property.  An interference with the enjoyment of land is “substantial” if it is not trivial; that is, it amounts to something more than a slight annoyance or trifling interference. Whether the interference is “unreasonable” depends on the circumstances. Factors that courts will consider (but are not bound to) in assessing reasonableness include the seriousness of the interference, the neighbourhood and surrounding area, and sensitivity of the plaintiff.  Public  nuisance  may  be  thought  of  as  a  nuisance  that  occurs  on  public  property  or  one  that  affects  a sufficient number of individuals that litigating to prevent it becomes the responsibility of the community at large. Trespass  to  Chattels–  Where  the  defendant  interferes  with  the  claimant’ s  goods  without  converting them to the defendant’ s personal use. Trespass  to  Land–  Trespass  to  land  is  actionable  even  where  it  occurred  by the  defendant’ s  mistake.  The claimant  does  not  need  to  show a loss,  although  their  award  may  be  reduced commensurately  if  the trespass does not cost them anything.  Conversion–  Conversion  is  defined  as  wrongful  interference  with  the  goods  of  another  in  a  manner inconsistent with the owner’ s right of possession.  This includes theft; it also includes instances where the defendant genuinely believes the goods belong to him/her, even if (s)he purchased them innocently from a third  party that stole them.  It also applies when the defendant has sold the goods or otherwise disposed of them.  The remedy is usually damages for the value of the goods and possibly for losses incurred by the detention of the goods.  The value of the goods is assessed from the time of the conversion. Unjust  Enrichment–  Where  the  defendant  was  enriched  by  committing  a  wrong against  the  claimant, the claimant suffered a corresponding loss, and there was no juristic reason for the enrichment.  3) Causes of action to see a lawyer aboutAssault–  Contrary  to  its  criminal  law  equivalent,  civil  assault  is  defined  as  intentionally  causing  the claimant  to  have reasonable  grounds  to fear  immediate  physical  harm.    Mere  words  or verbal  threats  are

Revision as of 01:59, 7 July 2016



Causes of Action

The cause of action is the claimant’s reason for bringing a suit against the defendant. While there must always be a cause of action, in Small Claims it is generally sufficient to cite the facts; Small Claims judges will take a liberal view of pleadings and allow litigants to assert claims in non-legalistic language. However, the judge must still be able to find a cause of action in the facts the claimant alleges. Potential claimants should therefore review the following, non-exhaustive list of causes of action to determine if they have a valid claim. Claimants may claim for more than one cause of action on a notice of claim and are advised to do so if they believe more than one cause of action applies or are not sure which one is valid; it is easier to name superfluous causes of action on the notice of claim than to get the claim amended after filing it. The following causes of action may be brought in Small Claims unless the amount claimed is over $25 000 or it states otherwise in the list. They are organized into 3 categories: 1) common; 2) rare; 3) see a lawyer

Defences

For each cause of action there are usually a number of possible defences. Both Claimants and Defendants should be aware of the defences. Below are defences to some of the more common causes of action.

1) Common causes of action

  • Breach of Contract – Contract law governs voluntary relationships between parties. It is a complicated and nuanced area of the law . To bring a claim for breach of contract, a party must demonstrate that the other party failed to perform a contractual obligation. Depending on the type of term that is breached, the other party may be able to “terminate” the contract. Termination. Terms that go to the heart of a contract are usually called “conditions”. Breach of a condition by one party entitles the other party to terminate the contract and end their obligations. Less important terms are called “warranties”. Breach of a warranty does not give the other party a right to terminate. However, the party not in breach can still sue the other party for breach of contract.
    • Defences:
  1. No consideration: In order for a promise or any other contractual obligation to be enforceable by courts, there must be consideration. Consideration is what is given in exchange for a promise that makes the promise binding. If there is no consideration for a promise, the promise will not be enforced by the courts, even if the parties have an otherwise valid contract.
  2. Void contract: A contract can be void and therefore unenforceable for several reasons, including lack of mental capacity, uncertainty of terms, illegality.
  3. Unconscionability: A contract is said to be unconscionable and therefore unenforceable where the circumstances surrounding the creation of the contract gave rise to a grave inequality in bargaining power between parties. This is complicated area of contract law, and legal advice should be sought.
  4. Misrepresentation: If the other party made a statement to you before the contract came into existence that you relied on in entering the contract and that turned out to be false, you may be able to have the contract set aside.
  5. Frustration: frustration occurs when an unforeseen event renders contractual obligations impossible or radically changes the primary purpose of the contract. Frustration is also another complicated area in contract law. Legal advice should be sought.
  • Breach of Employment Contract (implied terms) – The courts cannot enforce statutory rights such as those found in the Employment Standards Act, as special adjudicative bodies have been created to rule on these types of claims and have exclusive jurisdiction over them. However, many parallel rights exist at common law and may be enforced by the courts. At common law, employment contracts contain numerous implied terms that are actionable through Small Claims, such as the requirement to give reasonable notice or payment in lieu upon termination of an employee. The fact that no written employment contract was signed does not disqualify an employee or former employee from claiming for breach of these terms. See LSLAP Manual Chapter 6 – Employment Law for more details.
    • Defences: Just cause: If an employer terminates an employee for just cause the employer is not required to give the terminated employee reasonable notice or pay in lieu. The onus to prove just cause is on the employer, and the standard is generally hard to meet. See LSLAP Manual Chapter 06—Employment Law for more details. Debt– Debt claims arise where the defendant owes the complainant a specific sum of money, often for a loan or for unpaid goods or services. There may be some overlap between debt and breach of contract. oDefences: As there likely will be some overlap between debt and breach of contract, see the defences above under breach of contract. 2) Rare Causes of ActionBreach of Confidence - Breach of confidence occurs when the defendant makes an unauthorized use of information that has a quality of confidence about it and was entrusted to him/her by the claimant in circumstances giving rise to an obligation of confidence. Nuisance– Nuisance may be private or public. Private nuisance is defined as interference with a landowner or occupier’ s enjoyment of his/her land that is both substantial and unreasonable. It can include obnoxious sounds or smells or escaping substances, but does not usually arise from the defendant’ s normal use of their own property. An interference with the enjoyment of land is “substantial” if it is not trivial; that is, it amounts to something more than a slight annoyance or trifling interference. Whether the interference is “unreasonable” depends on the circumstances. Factors that courts will consider (but are not bound to) in assessing reasonableness include the seriousness of the interference, the neighbourhood and surrounding area, and sensitivity of the plaintiff. Public nuisance may be thought of as a nuisance that occurs on public property or one that affects a sufficient number of individuals that litigating to prevent it becomes the responsibility of the community at large. Trespass to Chattels– Where the defendant interferes with the claimant’ s goods without converting them to the defendant’ s personal use. Trespass to Land– Trespass to land is actionable even where it occurred by the defendant’ s mistake. The claimant does not need to show a loss, although their award may be reduced commensurately if the trespass does not cost them anything. Conversion– Conversion is defined as wrongful interference with the goods of another in a manner inconsistent with the owner’ s right of possession. This includes theft; it also includes instances where the defendant genuinely believes the goods belong to him/her, even if (s)he purchased them innocently from a third party that stole them. It also applies when the defendant has sold the goods or otherwise disposed of them. The remedy is usually damages for the value of the goods and possibly for losses incurred by the detention of the goods. The value of the goods is assessed from the time of the conversion. Unjust Enrichment– Where the defendant was enriched by committing a wrong against the claimant, the claimant suffered a corresponding loss, and there was no juristic reason for the enrichment. 3) Causes of action to see a lawyer aboutAssault– Contrary to its criminal law equivalent, civil assault is defined as intentionally causing the claimant to have reasonable grounds to fear immediate physical harm. Mere words or verbal threats are