The elements of the tort of negligence are well known: injury, duty, breach, and actual and proximate cause. It is uncontroversial that the plaintiff must establish each of these elements to make out the prima facie case of negligence. Accordingly, there is no tort unless all of these elements are established. As torts are understood to be wrongs, it seems to follow that there is a wrong if and only if all of the elements of the tort of negligence are satisfied. It seems to follow, then, that the wrong of negligence is constituted by the completed tort of negligence. This is the conclusion that I wish to challenge here. I shall contend that the wrong of negligence does not require the kind of legally cognisable injury that the tort of negligence plainly requires. Causing a material harm to another is not a prerequisite for wronging them. Instead, one wrongs another when one breaches the duty of care that one owes to them.

中文翻译：

---

过失的错误

过失侵权的要素是众所周知的：伤害、责任、违约以及实际和近因。毫无争议的是，原告必须确立这些要素中的每一个才能确定初步证据确凿的疏忽案例。因此，除非所有这些要素都成立，否则不存在侵权行为。由于侵权被理解为不法行为，因此似乎可以推论，当且仅当过失侵权的所有要素都得到满足时，才存在不法行为。由此看来，过失的过错由过失的完全侵权构成。这是我想在这里挑战的结论。我将争辩说，过失的过失并不需要过失侵权所明确要求的那种法律上可承认的损害。对他人造成物质伤害并不是冤枉他们的先决条件。反而，