Theoretical overview
Judicial and Quasi-Judicial Acts by a person are one of the defences available under the subject “General Defences under law of torts“.
There are three organs of the government that perform various functions individually. The legislative organ creates or makes changes in the law; the executive ensures that the laws passed by the legislative are enforced accordingly and the function of the judiciary is to make sure that the laws executed are implemented correctly in every situation.
A Judicial Act is an act done by an authority who is competent, for consideration of facts and situations and impose liability or affect the rights of others.
the acts that are done by a particular competent authority, by looking upon the facts and the circumstances of the situation are Judicial Acts. The judges are bound by the law to give decisions by following the complete court procedure.
a judicial officer exercising judicial function is called a Judicial Act.
The word ‘quasi’ is of Latin origin and means ‘similar but not exactly.’ The quasi-judicial acts are not exactly court proceedings. They may seem to derive the powers and functions of some laws, but they are still not considered as courts.
There are some bodies and individuals like colleges, societies, institutions which exercise quasi-judicial powers and are therefore protected from civil liability.
There are some bodies and individuals like colleges, societies, institutions which exercise quasi-judicial powers and are therefore protected from civil liability.
Quasi-Judicial is also known as a non-judicial body that can interpret law.
Parental Authority under the law of torts is an authority given to parents to control and correct their children by either kind of force and such people are protected under the law of torts only if they act in a reasonable manner and for a good cause.
Quasi-Parental comes from the Latin word “loco parentis” which means ‘in place of the parent’ or a person acting in a parental capacity. A quasi-parental authority has fewer rights than a parental authority. the quasi-parental authority also has the option of delegating its responsibilities to the other person
The law is that a parent, teacher, or other person having lawful control or charge of a child or young person is allowed to administer punishment on him
Parents are presumed to delegate their authority to the teacher when a child is sent to school Such an authority warrants the use of reasonable and moderate punishment only4 and, therefore, if there is an excessive use of force, the defendant may be liable for assault, battery or false imprisonment, as the case may be. The authority of a teacher to correct his students is not limited only to the wrongs which the student may commit upon the school premises but may also extend to the wrongs done by him outside the school
Important difference
| S.NO. | JUDICIAL ACTS | QUASI-JUDICIAL ACTS |
|---|---|---|
| 1. | The judicial acts require a proper proceeding of the court and the judge is duty-bound. | The quasi-judicial acts don’t require the courts and decisions taken under them are by the person, who is not a judge. |
| 2. | The judicial acts are bound by the common law precedents to give decisions. | The quasi-judicial acts are not usually bound. |
| 3. | In absence of any common law precedent, judicial acts may invent new laws. | The quasi-judicial is based on the decisions of the existing laws. |
Important case law
Anderson vs. Gorrie (1894)
Facts of the Case: – The plaintiff had accused two persons of taking money on false pretenses. However, on the advice of his lawyer, he withdrew the case. Here the presiding judge of the case remarked that the plaintiff was extorting money from the defendants by involving them in the trial.
Judgement of the Case: – In this case, no action will be taken against the judge as he was discharging his duties.
Sankunni vs. Swaminatha Pattar
In this case, the court held that the teacher cannot abstain from punishment on the pretext that the punishment has left no mark on the body, in one way or another if the punishment is likely to cause damage to the life and limb of the child, the teacher shall be charged under the law of Torts.
Cleary vs. Booth ((1893) 1 Q.B. 465)
Facts of the case: – The respondent was the headmaster of the school. Two boys fought on the way to school and the defendant punished them. The headmaster has been held responsible for assault and battery.
Judgment of the case: – In this case, the court held that the teacher was not liable as the authority of teachers is not limited only to the school premises but also outside the school. It is clear that the parents have control over the children at home and the teachers and principals in the school but the main question is who is in charge between the school and the home. It can be rightly said that the authority here is delegated to the teachers. They can not only correct them for their mistakes but also punish them. So, in the above case, the boys fought outside the school and the headmaster had the right to punish them
Points to remember
- A Judicial Act is an act done by an authority who is competent, for consideration of facts and situations and impose liability or affect the rights of others.
- The quasi-judicial acts are not exactly court proceedings.
- Parental Authority under the law of torts is an authority given to parents to control and correct their children by either kind of force and such people are protected under the law of torts only if they act in a reasonable manner and for a good cause.
- A quasi-parental authority has fewer rights than a parental authority. the quasi-parental authority also has the option of delegating its responsibilities to the other person
