EASYAmity University, Noida Law Admissions 2025
ApplyAdmissions open for B.A. LL.B (Hons) , B.A. LL.B , BBA LL.B.(Hons) , B.Com.LL.B. (Hons.)
Difference b/w Crime and Tort for CLAT - Practice Questions & MCQ
Edited By admin | Updated on Sep 25, 2023 25:26 PM | #CLAT
Quick Facts
-
10 Questions around this concept.
Solve by difficulty
Passage 4
Read the passage and answer the questions that follow.
“In the beginning,” of course, crime and tort were not sharply distinguished. In early common law, a victim could pursue justice for the same wrongful act either through a forerunner of criminal law or through a forerunner of tort law. But over time, criminal law and tort law have evolved to encompass a number of distinctive and contrasting features. The state prosecutes violations of criminal law. Tort law typically requires harm as a prerequisite to a remedy. Criminal law does not. Specifically, criminal law punishes not only: (a) Acts that are harmful to others, but also, (b) Acts that are harmful only or mainly to the actor being punished; (c) Dangerous acts that have not yet caused harm; and (d) Acts that the community considers immoral, even if the acts are not "harmful" in the narrower sense of the term. By contrast, tort law mainly provides a remedy for harmful acts, not for acts that create risks of future harm, and not for acts that are considered immoral but not harmful. Criminal law, in theory at least, contains a proportionality principle, requiring that the punishment "fit" the crime. The tort remedy usually does not vary with the culpability of the injurer. Suppose, in three separate incidents, injurers A, B, and C cause precisely the same harm to their respective automobile accident victims; but A is strictly liable for a manufacturing flaw in the automobile, a flaw that could not have been prevented by due care; while B is negligent for momentarily taking his eyes off the road; and C is negligent for dangerously passing another car on a busy highway. A, B, and C will pay precisely the same damages.
Thus, the requisite culpable state of mind in criminal law ranges from strict liability to negligence to recklessness to knowledge to purpose, with punishment varying according to that mens rea. (The multiple degrees and categories of homicide are the best example of this range.) And the conduct or social harm element also ranges enormously. By contrast, most tort law is governed by a negligence standard. There are relatively few categories of intentional torts and even fewer categories of recklessness and strict liability.
Question:
Which of the following factors are considered in criminal law which makes it to retain a broader spectrum of culpability than the tort law?
What is the meaning of tort?
The standard of proof in tort cases and criminal cases are?
Damages are awarded except in one case among the following options?
Concepts Covered - 1
Difference between Crime and Tort
| S.No. | Crime | Tort | |
| 1. | Nature and Purpose | Crimes are offenses against society as a whole. They violate established laws and societal norms, impacting the general order and well-being of the community. The state takes legal action in criminal cases to uphold public interest and impose penalties on offenders, such as fines, imprisonment, or other sanctions. The primary goal is to deter criminal behavior, protect the public, and maintain social order. | Torts, on the other hand, are civil wrongs that harm individuals or their property rights. They involve violations of personal rights and cause harm to individuals rather than society at large. In tort cases, the focus is on compensating the victim for the harm they have suffered. Private individuals or entities initiate legal action to seek monetary damages or injunctive relief. The primary aim is to restore the injured party to the position they were in before the harm occurred. |
| 2. | Legal Proceedings | Criminal proceedings are initiated by the state through law enforcement agencies and prosecutors. The accused is charged with a crime, and the case is presented in a criminal court. The burden of proof lies with the prosecution, which must prove the defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. If found guilty, the defendant may face penalties determined by law. |
Tort proceedings are civil lawsuits initiated by the injured party (plaintiff) against the alleged wrongdoer (defendant). The case is presented in a civil court, and the burden of proof rests with the plaintiff. The plaintiff must demonstrate that it is more likely than not that the defendant's actions were the cause of the harm suffered. If the defendant is found liable, they may be ordered to pay monetary compensation to the plaintiff.
|
| 3. |
Burden of Proof: |
In criminal cases, the burden of proof is on the prosecution, and they must establish the defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. This high standard of proof is intended to ensure that a person's liberty is not taken away arbitrarily. |
In tort cases, the burden of proof is on the plaintiff, who needs to show that it is more probable than not that the defendant's actions were responsible for the harm suffered. The standard of proof is lower than in criminal cases, reflecting the civil nature of the proceedings. |
"Stay in the loop. Receive exam news, study resources, and expert advice!"
Get Answer to all your questions
CLAT Articles
Back to top