• Order
  • Offers
  • Support
    • Due to unforeseen circumstances, our phone line will be unavailable from 5pm to 9pm GMT on Thursday, 28th March. Please be assured that orders will continue to be processed as usual during this period. For any queries, you can still contact us through your customer portal, where our team will be ready to assist you.

      March 28, 2024

  • Sign In

Disclaimer: This work was produced by one of our expert legal writers, as a learning aid to help law students with their studies.

Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the authors and do not reflect the views of LawTeacher.net. Any information contained in this case summary does not constitute legal advice and should be treated as educational content only.

Letang v Cooper - 1965

310 words (1 pages) Case Summary

4th Oct 2021 Case Summary Reference this In-house law team

Jurisdiction / Tag(s): UK Law

Legal Case Summary

Letang v Cooper [1965] 1 QB 232

Intention to cause harm and trespass to the person

Facts

In the summer of 1957, the claimant was sunbathing outside on a piece of land which ordinarily served as a car park. While she was sunbathing, the Defendant reversed over her legs with his car, causing her injury. The defendant did not do it intentionally, however the claimant had the option of claiming in negligence. She did not, immediately, choose to do so. By 1961 she had decided to start a claim, but as a claim of negligence had limitation period of three years (as per the Limitation Act 1939 2 & 3 Geo.6 c.21 as amended by section 2 of the Law Reform (Limitation of Actions, etc.) Act, 1954) she made a claim under trespass to the person.

Issues

The issue in this case was whether it was possible to make a claim under trespass to the person if the action was negligent rather than intentional as until then the tort of trespass to the person had been applied to both types of situation.

Decision/Outcome

Adopting the approach from Kruber v Grzesiak ([1963] VR 621) the court held that where the damage was caused by an action which was not intentional, then the proper action is one in negligence and not in trespass to the person. For the claimant, this meant that she could not start the action she had (based on trespass) and that her only available action was time barred. In terms of the law, the judgement of the court meant that a distinction was established between the torts of negligence and the trespass to the person based on intent. In effect, this meant that the law on trespass to the person has been narrowed.

Cite This Work

To export a reference to this article please select a referencing stye below:

Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.

Related Services

View all

Related Content

Jurisdictions / Tags

Content relating to: "UK Law"

UK law covers the laws and legislation of England, Wales, Northern Ireland and Scotland. Essays, case summaries, problem questions and dissertations here are relevant to law students from the United Kingdom and Great Britain, as well as students wishing to learn more about the UK legal system from overseas.

Related Articles