Law of Tort - Understanding Negligence and Liability

Running Head: LAW
Law of Tort
Name
Affiliation
Instructor
Date

2
Tort Law
Negligence
Negligence is described as one’s failure to exercise an appropriate and ethical form of care
when performing a duty. Acts of carelessness characterized by acts or omission that lead to
causation of injuries are called negligence. The consequence for negligence is damaged after
a plaintiff successfully proves that negligence existed. The backbone of negligence is that
employees and employers have the duty to carry out their activities with reasonable care by
understanding that foreseeable harm may be caused to people and property through
negligence. In cases where one suffers a loss due to negligence from a different person, he
or she has the right to sue that individual for damages so that a compensation is awarded.
Losses vary from physical injuries, psychiatric illnesses, harm to property and economic
losses. There are five main components that one has to prove so that negligence is
determined. These are a breach, assessment of duty, actual cause, damages, and proximate
cause.
Donoghue v Stevenson [1932] is a good example that shows how negligence manifests
itself.1 In this case, principles such as the duty of care as well as the principle of fault. The
facts state that Donoghue found a decomposing snail in her beer bottle after pouring the
remaining content on her ice cream. This shocked her and she suffered gastroenteritis and
nervous shock. As a result, she sued the manufacturer for damages. Grant v Australian
Knitting Mills (AKR) (1936) followed the precedent set by Donoghue V Stevenson hence
developing negligence law.2 This was where the duty of care must be depicted by employees
1 Donoghue v Stevenson [1932] AC 532
2 Grant v Australian Knitting Mills [1935] UKPC 62, [1936] AC 85; [1935] UKPCHCA 1, (1935) 54 CLR 49
(21 October 1935), Privy Council (on appeal from Australia).