Keenan and Riches’BUSINESS LAW

Chapter 11Business and the law of tort

Act 1996. In Loutchanskyv Times Newspapers (No 2)
(2002), the Court of Appeal held that where defamat-
ory material is published on the Internet and is not
removed, there is a continuing publication. The court
rejected the rule applied in the USA that time runs from
first publication.
Injurious or malicious falsehood is a separate tort
which is related to defamation. It consists of maliciously
making a false statement about a person or his property,
which is calculated to cause damage, and damage is
suffered as a result (see further, Chapter 15 ).

Economic torts

The term ‘economic torts’ is often used to describe a
number of torts which seek to protect business interests.
Some of these torts are considered in outline below.

Inducement of breach of contract

This tort consists of one person (A) inducing another
(B) to break his contract with a third person (C). C can
sue B for breach of contract, but C can also sue A in tort.

the claimant must be able to prove that the conspirators

intended to injure him. If the conspirators intended to

further or protect their own interests, there can be no

liability.

351

Lumleyv Gye(1853)

Gye persuaded a singer to break her exclusive contract

to sing at Lumley’s theatre and to sing for him instead. It

was held that Lumley was entitled to sue Gye in tort for

inducing a breach of the singer’s contract.

A modern example of the tort is where trade union
officials instruct their members to take industrial action.
If the union officials act within limits contained in
recent legislation, e.g. holding a secret postal ballot of its
members, any liability in tort will be covered by a stat-
utory immunity.

Conspiracy

This tort consists of an agreement between two or more
persons to do an act which is intended to injure another
person and does result in damage. There are two forms
of tortious conspiracy: conspiracy where the means used
are lawful, and agreements where the means used are
unlawful.

1 Conspiracy using lawful means.It is not necessary
to show that the conspirators used unlawful means; the
tort encompasses conduct which would be perfectly law-
ful if committed by an individual acting alone. However,

Crofter Hand Woven Harris Tweed Co

Ltdv Veitch(1942)

The defendants, officials of the Transport and General

Workers Union, imposed a ban on cheap imports of yarn

on to the island of Lewis by the claimant company and

any subsequent export of Harris tweed made from the

yarn. The union’s instructions were carried out by docker

members of the union without any breach of contract on

their part, so the claimant company sued instead for

conspiracy. The House of Lords held that, as the union’s

action was intended to protect the legitimate interests of

its members rather than to inflict injury on the claimants,

the union officials were not liable in conspiracy.

2 Conspiracy using unlawful means.If the conspir-

ators intentionally injure a person and use means which

are unlawful, i.e. a tort or a crime, they will not escape

liability by showing that their purpose was to protect

their own interests (Lonrho plcv Fayed(1991)).

The development of ‘economic torts’ was considered

recently by the House of Lords in OBG Ltdv Allan

(2007). The House considered three appeals which were

concerned with claims in tort for economic loss caused

by intentional acts, including breach of contract, caus-

ing loss by unlawful means, interference with contrac-

tual relations, breach of confidence and conversion.

Their Lordships rejected the notion of a unified theory

of economic torts, which treated procuring a breach of

contract as one aspect of a more general tort of inter-

ference with contractual rights. The tort of causing loss

by unlawful means differed from the tort of inducing

breach of contract in a number of ways. Any attempt to

create a union between them should be dissolved and

the independence of the two causes of action should be

recognised. With respect to the tort of causing economic

loss by unlawful means, the unlawful means consists of

acts intended to cause loss to the claimant by interfer-

ing with the freedom of a third party in a way which

is unlawful as against that third party and which is

intended to cause loss to the claimant. Acts against the

third party would only constitute unlawful means if they

were actionable by the third party or would be if he had

suffered loss.