"To constitute a tort, there must be a wrongful act and legal damages". Explain.

A tort consists of some act or omission done by the defendant whereby he has without just cause or excuse caused some harm to plaintiff. To constitute a tort, there must be: Wrongful act: The act complained of, should under the circumstances, be legally wrongful as regards the party complaining. In other words, it should prejudicially affect any of the above mentioned interests, and protected by law. Thus, every person whose legal rights, e.g., right of reputation, right of bodily safety and freedom, and right to property are violated without legal excuse, has a right of action against the person who violated them, whether loss results from such violation or not. Legal damages: It is not every damage that is a damage in the eyes of the law. It must be a damage which the law recognizes as such. In other words, there should be legal injury or invasion of the legal right. In the absence of an infringement of a legal right, an action does not lie. Also, where there is infringement of a legal right, an action lies even though no damage may have been caused. As was stated in Ashby v. White, (1703) 2 Ld. Raym. 938 legal damage is neither identical with actual damage nor is it necessarily pecuniary. Two maxims, namely: (i) Damnum sine injuria, and (ii) injuria sine damnum, explain this proposition. Damnum sine injuria Damnum means harm, loss or damage in respect of money, comfort, health, etc. Injuria means infringement of a right conferred by law on the plaintiff. The maxim means that in a given case, a man may have suffered damage and yet have no action in tort, because the damage is not to an interest protected by the law of torts. Therefore, causing damage, however substantial to another person is not actionable in law unless there is also a violation of a legal right of the plaintiff. Common examples are, where the damage results from an act done in the exercise of legal rights. Thus, if I own a shop and you open a shop in the neighborhood, as a result of which I lose some customers and my profits decline, I cannot sue you for the loss in profits, because you are exercising your legal right. [Gloucester Grammer School case, (1410) Y.B. Hill. 11 Hen, IV to 27, pp. 21,36]. Injuria sine damnum It means injury without damage, i.e., where there is no resultant damage yet it is an injury or wrong in tort, i.e., where there is infringement of a legal right not resulting in harm but plaintiff can still sue in tort. Some rights or interests are so important that their violation is an actionable tort without proof of damage. Thus when there is an invasion of an "absolute" private right of an individual, there is an injuria and the plaintiff's action will succeed even if there is no Damnum or damages. An absolute right is one, the violation of which is actionable per se, i.e., without the proof of any damage. Injuria sine damnum covers such cases and action lies when the right is violated even though no damage has occurred. Thus the act of trespassing upon another's land is actionable even though it has not caused the plaintiff even the slightest harm.