Assertion: trespass | /r/HasProperty | tort
Facets:
value: normally
type: DEGREE
Source sentences:
text: Perhaps I should move this article to trespass (tort).
text: Unfortunately, trespass (the tort) does not exist in these systems in any form substantively similar to common law (i.e. as a tort), and criminal trespass, which does exist in these systems in a roughly similar form (i.e. Hausfriedensbruch), ought to be given a separate article like assault.
text: Trespass in the ACT is considered a civil dispute or tort.
text: Trespass to chattels is a tort whereby the infringing party has intentionally (or, in Australia, negligently) interfered with another person's lawful possession of a chattel (movable personal property).
text: Trespass is a tort that requires someone to interfere with the property of the plaintiff in a direct manner.
text: A trespass is normally a tort (civil wrong where it is not necessary to prove any damage was caused) and not a crime (public wrong that triggers a prosecution and leads to punishment).
text: The dictionary states that trespass is considered a crime if it is done willfully, while it is a tort if the defendant commits a civil wrong which the plaintiff could sue over.
text: Trespass to person is a tort which is frequently committed in everyday life.
text: Trespass to person is a tort which is frequently committed in everyday life.
text: Trespass to the person is a tort involving wrongful direct interference with another person and traditionally included both intentional and negligent acts.
text: Trespass to person is a tort which is sometimes confused with other torts like Negligence.