 | This template is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw articles | | | Template | This template does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. |
|
The defences would apply to torts not listed in that section, wouldn't it make sense to make a separate section? Actually the necessity article only implies the defence is for property torts. I guess that might be an issue with that article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.128.50.20 (talk) 01:17, 28 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2008-11-28T01:17:00.000Z","author":"129.128.50.20","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-129.128.50.20-2008-11-28T01:17:00.000Z-Defences_in_the_intentional_torts_section","replies":[]}}-->
Another kind of strange thing is there's "Volenti non fit injuria" under the defences section, then Consent under the intentional torts section. Shouldn't these be in the same section? Or even the same article? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.128.50.20 (talk) 01:32, 28 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2008-11-28T01:32:00.000Z","author":"129.128.50.20","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-129.128.50.20-2008-11-28T01:32:00.000Z-Defences_in_the_intentional_torts_section","replies":[]}}-->
