Tort law is a very broad area of law; the legal term is used to describe activities that either intentionally or unintentionally cause injury to others or their properties, where the person causing the injury has no legal right to cause the injury. Thus being said there are many facts to look at in the case of farmer Brown vs. Chauncey and Gardiner Transport Ltd.
In this case the actions of Chauncey preformed were not intentional. Chauncey did not know that allowing his vehicle to wander onto the shoulder of the road would result in an electrical power interruption, killing 30 000 chickens of farmer Brown.
The actions of Chauncey may also be classified as nuisance, because allowing his truck to strike the overhead wires was an interference with farmer Browns electrical power witch suffered a loss of 30 000 chickens, on his personal property.
In this case all three parties involved may have used negligence in the damages that occurred. Chauncey negligence was his careless driving this case may have been avoided if paid more attention to his driving. Gardiner Transport Ltd. may have been negligence for not properly hiring and training qualified drivers to drive their trucks on the roads. And last farmer Brown in fact did have an alarm to detect if there was a power failure, but negligence may be brought to lack of attention in that the alarm detector was in plugged in during this power failure. This may have been foreseeable if the alarm detector was in a safe place where a disconnection would not occur. Gardiner Transport Ltd. May have been vicarious liable for the damages committed by the actions of their employee Chauncey.