Law Assignment: Tort of Negligence
9 Pages1722 Words538 Views
Added on 2020-05-28
Law Assignment: Tort of Negligence
Added on 2020-05-28
ShareRelated Documents
Running Head: Law1Law
Law2Part AIssue:Whether Brian and Ros can take action under tort of negligence for injury they suffered in the house?Law:Tort is considered as legal wrong under which one person commit any wrongful conduct against another person. The usual remedy under tort is award of damages. The tort of negligence is the legal action which can be brought by a person towards whom defendant owned a duty of care. Liability of defendant arises in the situation when duty to take care exists and breach of such duty results in damages. Tort of negligence includes three elements, and for making claim under tort of negligence plaintiff must prove these elements:Duty of care- Defendant must owned duty of care towards the plaintiff. Duty of care is considered as legal obligation for the purpose of avoiding causing harm and it exists in the situation when harm is reasonably foreseeable in nature in case care is not taken1. For the purpose of duty of care to be exists there must be sufficient relationship of closeness must be present between the two people Donoghue v Stevenson 1932 AC 5622. This can be understood through example, relationship between road user and driver and relationship between doctor and patient. 1 Legal services Commission, Negligence, < https://www.lawhandbook.sa.gov.au/ch01s05.php?>, accessed on 11thJanuary 2018. 2 Donoghue v Stevenson 1932 AC 562.
Law3Case law is considered as important case for understanding the duty of care. In this case, Lord Atkin states the general principle in context of tort of negligence. Individual must take care to avoid any such act or omission which they can reasonably foreseeable would cause injury to their neighbor. For this purpose, neighbor was the person who directly affected by the act of the individual and those also who individual reasonably thought to have them in observation as being so affected when individual direct their mind to acts or omissions which were called into question. This statement introduces two tests, foreseeability test and the proximity test. Proximity stands for closeness, which means whether person is closely or directly affected is known as the proximity test. In other words, plaintiff and defendant must have some level of closeness and such closeness must be the result of their relationship. On the other hand, foreseeability test includes those acts or omissions which can reasonably foresee. This test states that individual was under obligation to avoid any such act or omission which causes injury to another person and such injury was reasonably foresee. This can be understood through case law Chapman v Hearse (1961) 106 CLR 112.3Breach of duty- another element includes the breach of duty of care owned by defendant. In thisCourt consider whether such duty of care is breached by the defendant. For this purpose, Court considers the standard of care expected in those situations from the defendant. Court determines the standard of care by considering the actions of any other reasonable person in the similar situation. This can be understood through case law Vaughan v Menlove (1837) 3 Bing NC 4674. 3 Chapman v Hearse (1961) 106 CLR 112. 4 Vaughan v Menlove (1837) 3 Bing NC 467.
End of preview
Want to access all the pages? Upload your documents or become a member.
Related Documents
The Law of Negligencelg...
|5
|1203
|132
Commercial law : Sample Assignment PDFlg...
|14
|3265
|20
Law of Tort Question Answer 2022lg...
|7
|1648
|23
(Doc) Commercial Law : Assignmentlg...
|8
|1387
|36
Elements of Negligence Case Study 2022lg...
|8
|2027
|30
Negligence Scenario Course 2022lg...
|10
|2647
|9