With respect to battery, assault can be defined as an act of the defendant which causes the claimant reasonable (apprehend) of the infliction of a battery on him by the defendant.

If a lack of care allows an (annoy) to become excessive the defendant may be liable.

Match the torts with their definitions. There are two additional torts which do not have a matching definition.

Complete the gaps choosing one of the options provided.

Is this a Judicial Opinion or a Cookbook?

A lawsuit 

The legal dispute is an old one: To what extent is food containing a harmful ingredient a/an

Most modern courts apply a reasonableness test that looks at whether the substance was one a consumer would reasonably expect to find in a prepared dish, but the Massachusetts Supreme Court in this 1964 case adopted the older approach that there is no 

Reading the opinion, it wasn’t hard to predict the defendant was going to win in the end. The court reminisced fondly about the history of fish dishes, recounted several recipes for the same, and included statements such as “we consider that the joys of life in New England include the ready availability of fresh fish chowder.”

The court concluded:

[W]e consider a dish which for many long years, if well made, has been made generally as outlined above. It is not too much to say that a person sitting down in New England to consume a good New England fish chowder embarks on a gustatory adventure which may entail the removal of some fish bones from his bowl as he proceeds. We are not inclined to tamper with age old recipes by any 

— Webster v. Blue Ship Tea Room, Inc., 198 N.E.2d 309, 312 (Mass. 1964).

Choose the best word to complete the gaps.

Defamatory in England to Call Someone Ugly

A 1996 English libel case reminds me of the old Rodney Dangerfield joke: “My psychiatrist told me I’m going crazy. I told him, ‘Doc, if you don’t mind I’d like a second opinion.’ He said, ‘Alright, you’re ugly too.’”

In Berkoff v. Burchill, an English court of appeals held that describing a person as ugly can 

The English case arose from a Sunday Times article in which 

Nine months later, Burchill once again called Berkoff’s pulchritude into question, this time in a review of the movie Frankenstein. Describing “the Creature,” Burchill said: “It’s a very new look for the Creature—no bolts in the neck or flat-tap hairdo—and I think it works; it’s a lot like Stephen Berkoff, only marginally better-looking.”

Berkoff 

The court said a jury could “conclude that in the context the remarks about Mr. Berkoff gave the impression that he was not merely physically unattractive but actually repulsive” and that this could injure Berkoff’s ability to make a living by “lowering his standing in the estimation of the public … [by] making him an object of ridicule.”

— Berkoff v. Burchill, [1996] 4 All E.R. 1008 (Ct. App. 1996)

Translation:

"The wrongdoer failed to take reasonable precautions."

"The rule is that a master is vicariously liable for the torts of his servant."

In this sentence, the word "servant" can be translated as:

Translation:

"Negligence of a physician is commonly referred to as malpractice."

"The defendant inflicted damage on the plaintiff."

Translation: 

Torts can shift the burden of loss from the injured party to the party who is at fault or better suited to bear the burden of the loss.