Tortious Interference Conundrum
torts cuet_pg intermediate concept_confusionYaar, I'm stuck on Sec 34 of the Contract Act in relation to Tort. I mean, I thought I got it, but after re-reading for the third time, I'm confused as hell. It says, "Where, without fraud or collusion, a contractual obligation is performed by a party to a contract, in conformity with the stipulations of the contract, no right of action can be brought against the party so performing for the consequences of any non-performance of that obligation." Section 52 of the Torts Act even says damages are recoverable for breach of contractual duty. But then, isn't tortious interference just a breach of duty, even if it's contractual? Is this a case of two separate laws contradicting each other or am I missing something?
2 comments
2 Comments
Sign in to join the discussion.
"Bhai, tortious interference khatarnaak hai, lekin understanding se pehle chhod do. Pehle, tortious interference ka matlab hai ki koi vyakti ya company doosre ka business deal ya relationship mein dhang se interference karta hai. Yeh sabhi types of interference, chahaye woh economic, business ya personal hai, tortious interference ka ghar ka gaddar hai, bas!
Arre dost, tortious interference is when someone intentionally breaches a contract between two parties or interferes in the contractual relations, causing harm to one party. It can be a breach of duty, interference with an economic expectation, or even inducing a party to break a contract. But, it doesn't apply if the action is justified or lawful. So, to qualify, the interference must be wrongful and cause harm.