Assignment On Contract Law & Common Law - Breach Of RIghts
10 Pages3515 Words141 Views
Added on 2019-09-30
Assignment On Contract Law & Common Law - Breach Of RIghts
Added on 2019-09-30
ShareRelated Documents
Table of ContentsSolution -1.....................................................................................................................1Solution -2.....................................................................................................................2Solution -3.....................................................................................................................3Solution -4.....................................................................................................................5Solution -5.....................................................................................................................7References.....................................................................................................................9`1 | Page
Solution -1There are many circumstances where there exits infringement of rights of otherperson. The right so infringed may be either statutory right or it may be contractualright. The breach of contractual right entitles a person to initiate legal action under lawof contract. On the other hand the breach of statutory right entitles a person to initiatelegal action under common. The common law provides that when there is right thereis remedy. The common law provisions are based on the rule of equity and the remedyis available even if there is no legal provision for remedy under any law. (Anon(2019).The law relating to tort deals with breach of statutory right and consequences thereof.It is important to note that the law of tot has no applicability in case of criminal breachor contractual breach of right. (Anon (2019).The tort is common law remedy available against the civil wrong. The liability undertort law arises in case if plaintiff proves following before the court in satisfactorymanner namely:1.The defendant owes duty of care towards plaintiff. The defendant must haveresponsivity to maintain utmost care towards plaintiff. 2.There exits breach of duty of care on the part of plaintiff. Defendant wasnegligent in his act or has not honored minimum standard of care required to bemaintained. 3.The breach of duty has caused harm to plaintiff. 4.The plaintiff has to establish nexus between the negligence of the part ofdefendant and injury cased to him. This test is even known as but for test.The concept of but for test is most important in case if damages to plaintiff is causedby the negligence of defendant. The plaintiff is under obligation to prove direct nexusbetween damages caused to him and act of negligence of defendant. In case plaintifffail to prove so, defendant cannot be held liable. (Anon (2019).The liability of tort is vicarious in nature. The employer can be held liable for thewrong committed by his employee. However in case where the principle employer hasemployed independent contractor, generally he cannot be held liable for the wrongcommitted by person employed by independent contractor. The liability of principleemployer arises only if:1.The wrong committed by employee or independent contractor is authorized byor with the consent of principle employee. 2.The principle employer is in position to foresee the danger arising out of actand had failed to warn or to take reasonable steps. `2 | Page
Application:In the given case the labour working on the site gets injured due to foreseennegligence of the parties. In this regard the following points should be noted. 1.The initial contract to demolish the house was given to architect, surveyor anddemolition contractor. The decision not to demolish old garage was jointdecision. The work was done by them and they have left site. This makes itclear that they owe no duty of care towards employee employed by buildingcontractor. 2.As the labor is employed by building contractor; he owes duty of care towardsthem. He was under obligation to ensure safety of his worker. 3.The building contractor has instructed his labor to use the garage. It was theduty of contractor to ensure that the property he is instructing to use is in goodcondition, which was not done in this case. This makes it very clear that thebuilding contractor was negligent. 4.As the garage was old and rest of the property was destroyed, it can be said thatthe probable danger can be foreseen. 5.The owner of land cannot be held liable as she has appointed independentcontractor. Moreover the she has not allowed decision not to demolish oldgarage. Hence it can be said that she has not consented the act that has causedinjury.Conclusion:After analysing the case fact and legal provision, it can be concluded that onlybuilding contractor can be held liable under tort laws for the injury caused to labour. Solution -2The construction project needs to be executed with utmost care. This is because thepoorly managed project may cause various legal consequences. The poorly managedcontract may make defaulter liable under the law of contract for breach of contractualterm. It also many time creates liability under common law i.e. tort law. The tort iscivil long and creates liability when defendant breaches statutory rights of plaintiff.`3 | Page
End of preview
Want to access all the pages? Upload your documents or become a member.
Related Documents
Understanding Tort Law and Liability in Common Law Systemlg...
|5
|1518
|377
Law of Negligence and Misrepresentation | Assignmentlg...
|10
|2712
|185
Legal Issues in Business Organizations Tourism and Events Organizations Assessment for 2021lg...
|8
|2481
|370
ARBE1301- Construction Law and Legislationlg...
|14
|3370
|124
M1K316 - Applied Commercial Lawlg...
|6
|1198
|74
Business Law Assignment Vicarious Liabilitylg...
|5
|1298
|75