dc.contributor.author |
Ahmed, Raheel
|
|
dc.date.accessioned |
2023-12-12T09:42:01Z |
|
dc.date.available |
2023-12-12T09:42:01Z |
|
dc.date.issued |
2023-06-13 |
|
dc.identifier.citation |
Ahmed R "The Influence of Reasonableness in Determining Delictual or Tort Liability for Emotional Distress or Mental Harm in American and French Law" PER / PELJ 2023(26) - DOI http://dx.doi.org/10.17159/1727- 3781/2023/v26i0a15700 |
en |
dc.identifier.issn |
1727-3781 |
|
dc.identifier.uri |
http://dx.doi.org/10.17159/1727-3781/2023/v26i0a15700 |
|
dc.identifier.uri |
https://hdl.handle.net/10500/30710 |
|
dc.description.abstract |
American and French law, like South African law, recognises
claims for emotional or mental harm. Emotional, mental or
psychological harm was recognised by the courts only in the
nineteenth century and even though the mind and body in a
sense are considered as a unit, these types of claims are not on
a par with claims for physical bodily injury. Finding delictual or
tort liability for emotional, mental or psychological harm has been
problematic not only in South Africa but also in the United States
of America and France. Even though there are fundamental
differences in the law between these jurisdictions, the broader
questions the courts face is whether a claimant is entitled to
claim, the amount of damages that should be awarded and how
to limit liability with this type of claim. Limiting liability for
emotional or mental harm is generally the main concern but the
courts have found ways of using the elements of a delict or tort,
or concepts such as reasonable foreseeability of harm to limit the
claims. American, French and South African law recognise
claims for emotional, mental or psychological harm sustained by
primary and secondary victims. Thus emotional, mental or
psychological harm caused directly or indirectly is compensable.
In American and French law the concept of reasonableness
plays an important role, whether it be implicit or explicit, in
determining delictual or tort liability for the emotional or mental
harm sustained. In a sense, reasonableness also plays an
overarching role in determining liability. The influence of
reasonableness in determining delictual or tort liability for
psychiatric or psychological harm in English and South African
law will be discussed in a forthcoming contribution. In this
contribution the focus is on the influence of reasonableness in
determining delictual or tort liability for emotional or mental harm
in American and French law. |
en |
dc.language.iso |
en |
en |
dc.publisher |
Faculty of Law, North-West University |
en |
dc.subject |
American law; delict; emotional distress or harm; French law; intentionally inflicted emotional distress; mental harm; negligently inflicted emotional distress; reasonableness; tort. |
en |
dc.title |
The influence of reasonableness in determining delictual or tort liability for emotional distress or mental harm in American and French Law |
en |
dc.type |
Article |
en |
dc.description.department |
College of Law |
en |