Tort Law: Duty of Care Intelligence Assignment 2022

Tort Law
Running Head: COMMERCIAL LAW 0
4 / 1 5 / 2 0 2 0
Student’s Name

Tort Law 1
Contents
Issue................................................................................................................1
Laws.................................................................................................................1
Application.......................................................................................................3
Conclusion.......................................................................................................3
References.......................................................................................................5

Tort Law 2
Issue
What liabilities does Bob have for loss that happened to various parties
of the case?
Laws
To held liable a defendant for negligence, the claimant has to establish
some requirements, which are given below:-
1. Duty of care: - The first requirement is the presence of a standard of
care. Common Low of Tort outlines some relationships where such duty
deemed to be present. These relationships are those, which exist
between teacher-student, parent-child, doctor-patient, and other such
trustworthy relationships. In other relationships, the presence of duty
of care can be evaluated using “neighborhood test” which was given in
the decision of “
Donoghue v. Stevenson [1932] All ER 1.” As per this
test, a person owes such duty to neighbors and the neighbor is the
one, which is expected to be affected by that person’s action (Radi,
2018).
2. Duty of care:- Once the duty is to establish, the other requirement to
prove is a breach of such duty. Breach of duty refers to a situation
where the defendant fails to behave like a reasonable person. “Civil
Liability Act (2002) NSW” outlines some factors, which are necessary
to check while determining the subjective breach. These factors
include seriousness and likelihood of harm, the social utility of the
action of the defendant and steps, which the defendant was, requires
to take in the role of a reasonable person. It means if the harm is
serious in nature and was likely to be there hence the defendant may
be held liable for breach if the defendant did not take reasonable
actions to prevent the harm.