logo

Torts of Negligence Case Study

   

Added on  2020-10-23

7 Pages1435 Words251 Views
Torts of Negligence

TABLE OF CONTENTSINTRODUCTION...........................................................................................................................1SUMMARY OF FACTS:................................................................................................................1ASSUMPTIONS:.............................................................................................................................3SUMMARY OF ISSUE...................................................................................................................3

INTRODUCTIONThe present case study is about an accident which took place in Dreamworld's thunderRiver Rapids Ride in 2016, where four peoples died in that accident. The mishap could havebeen stopped if emergency button to stop the ride have been used on time, but operator wasunaware of the fact of use of that button. There are other factors which can indicates thenegligence on behalf of authorities of Dreamworld. In this essay a detail study of tort ofnegligence and its elements will be discussed. The plaintiff in this case is the estate of thedeceased and defendant here is Ardent Leisure Limited, which is the parent company ofDreamworld. The report will reflect that whether a claim against defended can be made undercommon law of negligence. Plaintiff: The estate of deceased (who died in Thunder River Rides of Dreamworld- Kate, Luke,Roozi and Cindy)Defendant: Parent company of Dreamworld: Ardent Leisure Ltd.SUMMARY OF FACTS:Torts of Negligence: A legal action which can be brought against a person (defendant) who owed a duty ofcare towards a person with whom a tort is done. Tort means a civil wrong done to a person or agroup of persons by other because of negligence (The law of Tort, 2018). Three major elementsin tort are: 1.Duty of care: the defendant owed a duty to take reasonable care of plaintiff at the time ofact of negligence. This means defendant is responsible to make sure a care of plaintiff istaken when an act/ activity is being performed. When an act of negligence occurs at thattime also defendant owe same duty to plaintiff. Civil liability Act 2002: section 5B (1) A person cannot be held liable for negligence in taking care of risk of harm,unless was not foreseeable and significant. A reasonable person would have taken precaution in that condition for avoidanceof harm if proper care was taken, seriousness of harm was known. 2.Breach: this means defendant fails to comply with given duty of care. The requisitestandards of care were not confirmed by defendant (Barry, 2017). He did not adhere to1

End of preview

Want to access all the pages? Upload your documents or become a member.

Related Documents
Case on Claim of Negligence
|11
|2433
|55

Law 504 Case Study | Assignment
|7
|1314
|37

Case Study of Dreamworld tragedy
|8
|1549
|46

NEGLIGENCE Page 7 of 11 qwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiop
|11
|2440
|361

Principals of Commercial Law : Assignment
|14
|3636
|205

Assignment on Law Negligence
|13
|3690
|372