Private Defence under the law of Torts

What is Private Defence?

Private Defence in tort law is among the different general defences provided under the law of torts. The general defences under the law of torts mean a set of excuses under which a person cannot be held liable or obliged for his actions. However, the plaintiff files a lawsuit against the defendant for a specific tort to avoid culpability, and if all the requirements of that tort are met, the defendant will be held accountable for the same.

CLAT 2025: 10 Free Mock Tests | Legal Maxims | Landmark Judgements | PYQs

CUET BA LLB 2025:  Legal Studies ebook | 5 Free Mock Tests

MH CET LAW 2025: 10 Free Mock Tests | Legal Reasoning Practice Questions

Monthly Legal Current Affairs:  August’24 | July’24 | June’24

This Story also Contains

1. What is Private Defence?
2. Meaning of General Defences under Tort
3. Types of General defences under the Law of Torts
4. Private Defence
5. Scope of Private Defence
6. Essentials of Private Defence
7. Private Defence in Tort Cases
8. Restrictions on the use of Private Defence in tort
9. Private Defence in Tort Case Laws
10. Conclusion

Meaning of General Defences under Tort

The defendant is responsible when a plaintiff files a lawsuit against them alleging a specific tort or breach of a legal right that results in legal damages and the plaintiff is successful in establishing the elements of the lawsuit.

However, there are a few situations in which the defendant can assert defences to absolve himself of accountability. The general tort defences listed below are these.

Types of General defences under the Law of Torts

Volenti non-fit Injuria

Volenti non-fit injuria is a Latin phrase that means "to a willing person, injury is not done." This is frequently referred to as the consent defence. A person does not have a legal claim for damages when they provide their agreement to suffer an injury at the hands of the wrongdoer. Put another way, if a tort is committed and damages are sought, the party committing the tort will not be held liable if they can demonstrate to the judge that the plaintiff agreed to the harm or risk of harm.

Fault of the Plaintiff

This argument rests on a very simple principle: the defendant cannot be held accountable for their tortious act if the plaintiff is at fault. In contrast to volenti non-fit injuria, where the plaintiff enables the harm to occur, in this scenario the plaintiff causes the injury.

Act of God

This is a situation where an unforeseen occurrence occurs that is out of the defendant's control. It is described as an exceptional occurrence that may result from natural sources. This is a general defence that is also applicable to tort law.

Statutory Authority

Even if a legally sanctioned act is a tort, liability does not flow from it. The most common illustration of this may be found in police personnel. During the investigation and arrest, they are entitled to specific rights as stipulated by multiple statutes. Therefore, if a police officer enters a property to carry out an investigation or make an arrest, they cannot be held accountable for trespassing.

Private Defence

In tort situations, the most common general defence is private defence. When the defendant, while in urgent danger, uses reasonable force to defend his body, property, or the property of another, and has no time to report the occurrence to the right authorities, it is deemed a private defence in tort law. The harm inflicted ought to be commensurate with the conditions.

Scope of Private Defence

In tort law, private defence in tort law is a crucial legal protection that lets people shield their belongings and themselves from impending damage and risk. The right to private defence in tort, which is the fundamental idea that permits people to take reasonable precautions to protect themselves from danger without the prompt aid of the government, is based on the principle of self-preservation. It is a natural human right for people to use force to defend themselves under specific conditions.

Essentials of Private Defence

Imminent Threat or Danger

There should be an urgent threat to the defendant's life, property, or the property of another person, with no time for reporting to the closest authorities. The defendant may begin a private defence if he is unable to get in touch with that particular authority.

In the case of Morris v. Nugent

The defendant's dog bit him out of rage as he was walking past the plaintiff's house. In self-defence, the defendant lifted his revolver and shot the dog. He did not stop shooting the dog even when it raced away. The plaintiff filed a lawsuit with the court, demanding damages. The accused contended that he was acting under his right to self-defence. The defendant's action was deemed unjustified by the court since the dog was fleeing from him and there was no immediate threat to his life.

Use of Proportional Force

The amount of force applied ought to be commensurate with the perceived urgency of the situation. It should never be more than what is necessary. The specific facts and circumstances of each instance determine what constitutes a reasonable force.

Force to Protect Life or Property

According to this essential of private defence, the force used on a person should be to protect life and property from harm or damages, And the general rule should be the force used in private defence should be equivalent to the force used by the offender. This defence only works when there is no time to inform the respective authorities for help if there is time to inform the authorities for help this general defence will not work.

Necessity

The Act of private defence should only be used when there is no other option and it becomes a necessity for the person to use private defence. When there is no time left in the hands of the victim as the attack was so sudden in such a case the victim can use the private defence.

Private Defence in Tort Cases

For protection of individual

With the use of private defence, people can safeguard their belongings and themselves against impending harm or danger. The private defence is only used to protect oneself from harm to the body and damage to property.

Measure of Force

The use of force is restrained by private defence, preventing persons from abusing their power or breaking the law. The force used to save an individual under private defence should be equivalent to the force used by the offender, it should not extend beyond the reasonable force.

Liability on Force used

If an excessive force is used by the victim in comparison to the actual amount of force which has to be used will be liable according to the law. This means under the purview of private defence an individual cannot exceed the amount of force.

Burden of Proof

In situations when the private defence is raised, the burden of proof is with the defendant to demonstrate that they acted in self-defence and that the force they employed was appropriate and proportionate to the threat.

Restrictions on the use of Private Defence in tort

• The only uses of the right are self-defence, property protection, and the defence of another person's life or property. It cannot be utilized to exact retribution or retaliation.

• Force must be applied judiciously and in proportion to the threat.

• The right cannot be exercised in the absence of an immediate risk of harm or danger.

• Public personnel cannot be prevented from performing their duties when they are exercising their rights.

• Using private defense for hostile or retaliatory ends is prohibited. It is not acceptable for someone to punish the other person with force.

Private Defence in Tort Case Laws

Bird v. Holbrooke

In this case, The defendant set up a spring gun trap in his backyard to apprehend the intruder who had been stealing items from it. However, after putting the spring gun trap in place, the defendant neglected to put up a warning sign at the entrance or on the wall. While following an evading bird, the plaintiff unintentionally wandered into the defendant's garden. When the plaintiff entered the defendant's garden, a spring pistol trap was set, causing injury to them.

The Honorable Court remarked after considering the case's facts that if the trap is set up without giving enough notice, the defendant will be liable for any damages resulting from injuries caused by the air spring pistol going off.

Ramaniya Mudali v. M. Gangan

In this instance, the defendant put in electric wires around her house as the landowner to keep intruders away. The plaintiff was shocked by electricity when attempting to enter the house at night, resulting in injuries for which he filed a claim for damages.

The court in this case held that The plaintiff would be awarded damages. Because she failed to provide the plaintiff with a clear warning about the electric lines, the Private Defense defence will not be applicable in this case.

Conclusion

The general defences are given under the Law of Torts according to which a person will not be held liable for the acts done under such circumstances. The defences provided by the Law of Torts include Volenti non-fit injuria, Act of God, Fault of the Plaintiff, Statutory authority and private defence. This article talks about the defence of private defence as given under the Law of Torts.