Civil penalty

Last updated

A civil penalty or civil fine is a financial penalty imposed by a government agency as restitution for wrongdoing. The wrongdoing is typically defined by a codification of legislation, regulations, and decrees. The civil fine is not considered to be a criminal punishment, because it is primarily sought in order to compensate the state for harm done to it, rather than to punish the wrongful conduct. As such, a civil penalty, in itself, will not carry jail time or other legal penalties. [1] [ better source needed ] For example, if a person were to dump toxic waste in a state park, the state would have the same right to seek to recover the cost of cleaning up the mess as would a private landowner, and to bring the complaint to a court of law, if necessary.

Contents

Civil penalties occupy a strange place in some legal systems - because they are not criminal penalties, the state need not meet a burden of proof that is "beyond a reasonable doubt"; but because the action is brought by the government, and some civil penalties can run into the millions of dollars, it would be uncomfortable to subject citizens to them by a burden of proof that is merely a "preponderance of the evidence." Therefore, the assessment of most civil penalties requires a finding of "clear and convincing evidence" before a civil defendant will be held liable. A defendant may well raise excuses, justifications, affirmative defenses, and procedural defenses. An administrative law judge or hearing officer may oversee the proceedings and render a judgment. Judgment is made on the balance of probabilities, meaning if it is more than fifty percent likely that the accused is responsible then the accused shall be found guilty.

In some cases, a civil penalty may be supplemented by other legal process, including administrative sanctions or even criminal charges, and their respective appeals. For example, failure to pay a fine assessed for a traffic code violation may result in administrative suspension of a driver's license, and further driving after suspension may be a criminal offense. On the other hand, a minimal case may be "put on file", or otherwise suspended for a period during which the defendant may be required to avoid further violations, or carry out specific duties (such as making repairs or restitution, or attending supplemental education), after which the matter is dismissed.

In other cases, such as public safety and consumer protection violations, the local authorities may revoke permits and licenses, and seek injunction to stop or remove non-conforming works or goods, in addition to the civil penalty.

Pending or admitted civil violations may also be used as evidence of responsibility in a civil suit. One example is speeding causing in a car accident, resulting in a wrongful death claim. However, the plaintiff may be required to prove causation through a harm encompassed in the regulations.

Civil Penalties in England

The concept of civil penalties in English is in a state of flux. In contract, damages is a remedy to provide monetary compensation for loss; and damages may be unliquidated (general damages), or liquidated (pre-determined). In the absence of an out-of court settlement, unliquidated damages must be ascertained by a court or tribunal, whereas liquidated damages will be determined by reference to the contract or to a mutually agreed arbitrator. The purpose of liquidated damages is to provide certainty and to avoid both the bother and cost of legal proceedings.

It is well established that liquidated damages for breach of contract are void if they seek to punish rather than to compensate for loss. For a contractual "penalty" clause to be valid, one must show that it was drawn up after a bona fide attempt to estimate loss in advance of the breach. For example, a motorway construction contract may have an estimated finish date with a "penalty clause" for every day late; but provided that this date is realistic and the "penalty" is a reasonable approximation of loss, the clause will be valid. The validity of the clause will be advanced if there is an equivalent bonus for finishing early.

Difficulties can arise with fines for wrongful parking (parking in the wrong area, or overstaying). There are three scenarios: (i) parking on public streets; & parking in a private car park either (ii) with permission, or (iii) without permission. If a parking fine is imposed for type (i), since the powers exercised by the local authority have been delegated by Parliament, there is little that one can do, except to seek judicial review and allege disproportionality. If it is type (ii), such as in a supermarket car-park, then contract rules apply. If, say, the cost was £1 for an hour, and you got a £60 ticket for overstaying a further hour, you can legally send them an extra £1, plus (say) £5 as a contribution to their administration expenses. If they are not satisfied, they would have to issue a county court summons, which might not be cost effective.

In type (iii) where one has parked on private land without permission, a typical notice might read: "In parking on this land, you hereby accept that your vehicle will be clamped and a £100 release charged". Although this may seem a simple matter of trespass with an unavoidable fine, it may amount to a case of implied contract (i.e. "if you park here, you agree to pay a penalty"); and such a "penalty" (read "damages") must be proportionate or else the fine will be void. Also, since the penalty notice could have been attached to the windscreen, the clamping of the vehicle may itself be unlawful trespass. Since the introduction of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (also known as POFA), that wheel clamping is illegal unless by an Authority (e.g. Police, Local Authority or DVLA).

See also

Related Research Articles

At common law, damages are a remedy in the form of a monetary award to be paid to a claimant as compensation for loss or injury. To warrant the award, the claimant must show that a breach of duty has caused foreseeable loss. To be recognised at law, the loss must involve damage to property, or mental or physical injury; pure economic loss is rarely recognised for the award of damages.

Defamation is the oral or written communication of a false statement about another that unjustly harms their reputation and usually constitutes a tort or crime. In several countries, including South Korea, a true statement can also be considered defamation.

A tort, in common law jurisdiction, is a civil wrong that causes a claimant to suffer loss or harm, resulting in legal liability for the person who commits the tortious act. It can include intentional infliction of emotional distress, negligence, financial losses, injuries, invasion of privacy, and many other things. The word 'tort' stems from Old French via the Norman Conquest and Latin via the Roman Empire.

A wrong is an act that is illegal or immoral. Legal wrongs are usually quite clearly defined in the law of a state and/or jurisdiction. They can be divided into civil wrongs and crimes in common law countries, while civil law countries tend to have some additional categories, such as contraventions.

Acquittal The legal result of a verdict of not guilty

In common law jurisdictions, an acquittal certifies that the accused is free from the charge of an offense, as far as the criminal law is concerned. The finality of an acquittal is dependent on the jurisdiction. In some countries, such as the United States, an acquittal operates to bar the retrial of the accused for the same offense, even if new evidence surfaces that further implicates the accused. The effect of an acquittal on criminal proceedings is the same whether it results from a jury verdict or results from the operation of some other rule that discharges the accused. In other countries, the prosecuting authority may appeal an acquittal similar to how a defendant may appeal a conviction.

The law of restitution is the law of gains-based recovery, in which a court orders the defendant to give up his gains to the claimant. It should be contrasted with the law of compensation, the law of loss-based recovery, in which a court orders the defendant to pay the claimant for their loss.

A legal remedy, also referred to as judicial relief or a judicial remedy, is the means with which a court of law, usually in the exercise of civil law jurisdiction, enforces a right, imposes a penalty, or makes another court order to impose its will in order to compensate for the harm of a wrongful act inflicted upon an individual.

Liquidated damages

Liquidated damages, also referred to as "liquidated and ascertained damages" (LADs), are damages whose amount the parties designate during the formation of a contract for the injured party to collect as compensation upon a specific breach. This is most applicable where the damages are intangible, such as a failure by the contractor on a public project to fulfill minority business subcontracting quotas.

Damages for breach of contract is a common law remedy, available as of right. It is designed to compensate the victim for their actual loss as a result of the wrongdoer’s breach rather than to punish the wrongdoer. If no loss has been occasioned by the plaintiff, only nominal damages will be awarded.

Penal damages

Penal damages are liquidated damages which exceed reasonable compensatory damages, making them invalid under common law. While liquidated damage clauses set a pre-agreed value on the expected loss to one party if the other party were to breach the contract, penal damages go further and seek to penalise the breaching party beyond the reasonable losses from the breach. Many clauses which are found to be penal are expressed as liquidated damages clauses but have been seen by courts as excessive and thus invalid.

A civil conspiracy or collusion is an agreement between two or more parties to deprive a third party of legal rights or deceive a third party to obtain an illegal objective. A conspiracy may also refer to a group of people who make an agreement to form a partnership in which each member becomes the agent or partner of every other member and engage in planning or agreeing to commit some act. It is not necessary that the conspirators be involved in all stages of planning or be aware of all details. Any voluntary agreement and some overt act by one conspirator in furtherance of the plan are the main elements necessary to prove a conspiracy. A conspiracy may exist whether legal means are used to accomplish illegal results, or illegal means used to accomplish something legal. "Even when no crime is involved, a civil action for conspiracy may be brought by the persons who were damaged."

The legal principle of vicarious liability applies to hold one person liable for the actions of another when engaged in some form of joint or collective activity.

Adequate remedy

An adequate remedy or adequate remedy at law is part of a legal remedy which the court deems satisfactory, without recourse to an equitable remedy. This consideration expresses to the court whether money should be awarded or a court order should be decreed.. Adequate remedy at law refers to the sufficient compensation for the loss or damages caused by the defendant with a proper monetary award. The court must grant the adequacy of remedy that will lead to a "meaningful hearing". Whether legal damages or equitable relief are requested depends largely on,whether or not the remedy can be valued. Both two elements, compensation and the meaningfulness of hearing, provide a proper way to have an adequate remedy. The word "meaningfulness" of hearing in the law process is the assumption that the defendant compensated must be meaningful for the injured party where the defendant made a fully covered compensation for all the losses. Hence, the hearing in which cannot give any right amount of compensation award or settlement is not "meaningful", and the unavailability of the compensation will lead to an inadequate remedy. The adequate remedy at law is the legal remedies by meaning it is satisfactory compensation by way of monetary damages without granting equitable remedies.

The following outline is provided as an overview of and introduction to tort law:

The Double Jeopardy Clause of the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution provides: "[N]or shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb..." The four essential protections included are prohibitions against, for the same offense:

Contract Legally binding document establishing rights and duties between parties

A contract is a legally binding document between at least two parties that defines and governs the rights and duties of the parties to an agreement. A contract is legally enforceable because it meets the requirements and approval of the law. A contract typically involves the exchange of goods, service, money, or promise of any of those. "Breach of contract", means that the law will have to award the injured party either the access to legal remedies such as damages or cancellation.

<i>Attorney General v Blake</i> English contract law case on damages for breach of contract

Attorney General v Blake[2000] UKHL 45, [2001] 1 AC 268 is a leading English contract law case on damages for breach of contract. It established that in some circumstances, where ordinary remedies are inadequate, restitutionary damages may be awarded.

<i>Murray v Leisureplay plc</i>

Murray v Leisureplay plc [2005] EWCA Civ 963 is an English contract law case, concerning the termination of an agreement and penalty clauses.

Penalties in English law

Penalties in English law are contractual terms which are not enforceable in the courts because of their penal character. Since at least 1720 it has been accepted as a matter of English contract law that if a provision in a contract constitutes a penalty, then that provision is unenforceable by the parties. However, the test for what constitutes a penalty has evolved over time. The Supreme Court most recently restated the law in relation to contractual penalties in the co-joined appeals of Cavendish Square Holding BV v Talal El Makdessi, and ParkingEye Ltd v Beavis.

<i>Cavendish Square Holding BV v Talal El Makdessi</i>

Cavendish Square Holding BV v Talal El Makdessi[2015] UKSC 67, together with its companion case ParkingEye Ltd v Beavis, are English contract law cases concerning the validity of penalty clauses and the application of the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Directive.

References

  1. Ronald B. Standler (1998). "Differences between Civil and Criminal Law in the USA" . Retrieved 14 July 2014.