Contract vs tort
The classic 19th century definition of a contract is 'a promise or set of promises which the law will enforce' (Pollock, Principles of Contract 13th edition). That is to say, there is reciprocity of undertaking passing between the promisor and the promisee.
Tort, on the other hand, is generic in nature and therefore more difficult to define. It is a collection of civil law remedies entitling a person to recover damages for loss and injury which have been caused by the actions, omissions or statements of another person in such circumstances that the latter was in breach of a duty or obligation imposed at law.
In contract, the rights and obligations are created by the acts of agreement between the parties to the contractual arrangement.
In tort, the rights and obligations are created by the courts applying common law, which has, on the basis of previous authority fallen into three distinct categories:
Historically, actions in contract and in tort derived from the same source - trespass - compared with actions for breach of a deed, which were based upon an action on the covenant. Actions for breach of contract were based on assumpsit and actions in tort were ex delicto. In the 17th century the courts began to draw procedural but not substantive distinctions between assumpsit and actions ex delicto.
These distinctions became substantive differences during the nineteenth century, reflecting the political social and economical philosophy of 'laissez-faire', which emphasised the importance of the legal doctrines of freedom of contract and sanctity of contract.
The area of tort which recently has been most exhaustively considered by the courts is negligence.
In a lecture to the Technology & Construction Bar Association and the Society of Construction Law on 30th October 2014, Lord Justice Jackson described the difference as: “The law of tort or delict requires D (defendant) to refrain from injuring C’s (claimant) person or property, alternatively to compensate C for any injury or loss caused. The law of contract requires D to fulfil his promises to C or, in default, to make compensation.” Ref https://www.scl.org.uk/sites/default/files/Concurrent%20Liability_0.pdf
[edit] Related articles on Designing Buildings Wiki
- Alternative dispute resolution.
- Adjudication.
- Arbitration.
- Breach of contract.
- Causes of construction disputes.
- Construction contract.
- Contract negotiation.
- Delict.
- Derogation from grant.
- Dispute resolution boards.
- Donoghue v Stevenson.
- Mediation.
- Modifying clauses in standard forms of contract.
- Negligence.
- Procurement
- Scheme for Construction Contracts.
- Strict liability.
- Trespass.
Featured articles
Check out some of the best features and news from Designing Buildings as well as key stories from around the web.
Construction Management, 8 July
NEETs crisis drives interest in trades, but apprenticeships barriers remain.
Passive fire protection webinar
MEP services penetration seals.
Where its at podcast (and video) - The role of the Architectural Technologist as an Expert Witness.
More than 200 remarkable buildings added to SAVE’s Buildings at Risk register.
Government scraps pre-application consultation for Nationally Significant Infrastructure Projects.
Historic England and infrastructure
New projects offer opportunities for the historic environment and local communities.
Construction Management, 2 July
Construction deaths halve in two years.
Green Book changes to drive investment in all parts of UK.
Minimum energy efficiency standards (MEES)
CIAT briefing on response to consultations for privately rented non-domestic properties.
Connect, collaborate, shape the future
Registration now live for UK Construction Week Birmingham.
CIOB announces Saul Humphrey FCIOB as new President for 26/27 term.
A quick, simple, and zero-bills solution to prevent overheating.

















