Negligence: A Study

Running head: NEGLIGENCE: A STUDY
NEGLIGENCE: A STUDY
Name of the Student
Name of the University
Author Note

NEGLIGENCE: A STUDY1
Answer 1
Negligence is an offence of civil nature committed by an individual under the tort law. It
is the action performed by a person or an avoidance to perform the action by that person. If a
certain individual does the exact opposite of what an individual of reasonable nature would do, it
may give rise to negligence1. The foundation for negligence was established in Donoghue v
Stevenson (1932)2. In this case, it was provided that even in the situation where there is no
contract, either expressed or implied, a negligence suit shall be accomplished. The first
component of negligence was instituted in this case. This component is the duty to care. This
duty is for any individual or group of individuals who are impacted by the negligence committed
by the person in question. Three ideas were established in Caparo Industries case3, which shall
influence the duty of care towards any individual or group. Firstly, the behavior of the individual
causing the harm, must be rationally predictable. Secondly, there must be a relationship of
proximity. Thirdly, accountability can be levied only when it is rational and just to do so4. The
second component is the infringement of duty to care5. In a given case of negligence, the
standard of the duty to care shall be observed by the court based on the rational behavior of a
sensible person. Any alterations shall be advised by the court if it is needed in case the defendant
is unsuccessful to achieve the compulsory standard. The people of the professional world should
follow the rational standards of professionalism. The rules provided to be followed by the
employees at a workplace may be considered as rational conduct. It is rational to provide
additional care that is more than the usual care to any fragile or restricted individual. However, in
1 Luntz, Harold, et al. Torts: cases and commentary. LexisNexis Butterworths, 2017.
2 Donoghue v Stevenson (1932) ac 562
3 Caparo Industries plc v Dickman (1990) 2 ac 605
4 Stickley, Amanda P. Australian torts law. LexisNexis Butterworths, 2016.
5 Abikhair, Melody R., et al. "Liability in the context of misdiagnosis of melanoma in Australia." The Medical
Journal of Australia 200.2 (2014): 119-121.

NEGLIGENCE: A STUDY2
certain situations, the reasonableness is beyond the capabilities of an individual and harm was
caused even after the individual doing the right thing. In these cases, the court states that the
individual has attempted the general duty.
The third component is the cause in fact. It is very much required to establish the
interrelationship between the cause and the effect in connection to the damage caused by
negligent act. The plaintiff must ascertain that the negligence on the part of the defendant has
caused the injury to the plaintiff6. The fourth component is the proximity cause. This cause is
differed from the factual cause. In certain cases, there may be remoteness in the relation between
the damage of the plaintiff and action of the defendant, however, the action done by the
defendant led to a series of circumstances, which in a way led to the plaintiff, and the plaintiff
suffered injuries because of the action. In such situations, the court must analyze the events of a
particular case and the significance of these events in connection to the action or avoidance to act
by the defendant and the harm suffered by the plaintiff7. Sometimes, the level of remoteness is
very high. In such cases, the court exempts the defendant from the act of negligence as the
connection between the damage caused and the action is unconvincing. When third parties are
involved, in such cases, the defendants might also be exempted; if it can be proved that, the
accountability of the third party is higher than the accountability of the defendant party. The fifth
component is the actual damage suffered by the plaintiff by the violation of the duty done by the
defendant8. It must be the burden of the plaintiff to prove the fact that the harm suffered by him
was due to the negligence of the defendant9. When the injury of the plaintiff is grave, for instance
6 Khodapanahandeh, Solmaz, and Sahar Khodapanahandeh. "PHARMACISTS'NEGLIGENCE AND PRINCIPLES
OF LIABILITY." (2013): 45-62.
7 Barravecchio, Joseph A. "The tort of negligence." Legaldate25.4 (2013): 4.
8 Gutierrez, Ana Laura Campos, Kriengsak Panuwatwanich, and Angela Walker. "Learning from the Past: Analysis
of Factors Contributing to Construction Project Disputes in Australia." Law and Dispute Resolution (2013).
9 Laing, Gregory K., and Simon Hoy. "A Retrospective of Professional Liability of Auditors in Australia." Journal
of New Business Ideas & Trends 16.1 (2018).