Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
chapter 5 the law of torts
basic principles tort law
principles applicable to tort of negligence- law
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: chapter 5 the law of torts
OBJECTIVES AND METHODOLOGY
OBJECTIVES:
TO STUDY AND CRITICALLY ANALISE THE CASE IN THE CONTEXT OF THE PRINCIPLES INVOLVED.
TO DRAW UP THE COMMON INFERENCE WHILE STUDYING THE USE OF THE PRINCIPLE IN OTHER CASES.
METHODOLOGY
THE BASIC METHODOLOGY ADOPTED TO PREPARE THIS RESEARCH IS DEDUCTIVE THAT IS TO STUDY VARIOUS CASES, TO ANALYSE THE LAWS IN THE SAME TOPIC AND UNDERSTAND THE GENERAL PRINCIPLE TO DRAW A GENERAL CONCLUSION.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1:......................................INTRODUCTION
2:......................................PRINCIPLES INVOLVED
3:......................................CRITICAL ANALYSIS
4:......................................CONCLUSION
5:......................................BIBLIOGRAPHY
INTRODUCTION
Since the Annus case the trends rather we should say the general trends were to provide the damages to the owner of the premises and they were purely economic losses. But in this case that trend was overruled and there began a new trend and new principles that we will come across while going through the whole project. There were many questions raised like a duty of care is owed to whom? How damages can be provided in a particular case like this? But one thing is for sure that this case can be considered as a landmark case in the history of `Torts' as we come across a very few cases where the well established principles like here are overruled.
A BRIEF INTRODUCTION OF THE CASE
MATERIAL FACTS
The plaintiff bought a built as such to the plans approved by the defendants. But the independent consulting engineers who had carelessly failed to note an error in the calculations which rendered inadequate the concrete raft foundation necessited by the sl...
... middle of paper ...
....
The requirement that the house be "imminently dangerous" was was unworkable and the novel type of damage introduced byAnnus was inherently unstable and indeterminate: if seen as personal injury, the damage is purely potential, not actual; If seen as actual,it is economical loss, the money needed to make the house safe.
Therefore there arose a requirement of the new principles which could overrule the orthodox principles as established by the Annus case and this was nicely done by Murphy v. Brentwood district council case.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
BOOKS -
Dr. R. K. Bangia, Law Of Torts, (Allahabad Law Agency, Faridabd, 17th edn., 2003)
Justice G. P. Singh (Ed.), Ratan Lal & Dhiraj Lal On The Law Of Torts (Wadhwa And Company, Nagpur, 24th edn., 2002)
REPORTERS
ALL ENGLAND REPORTERS
WEBSITES VISITED -
WWW.GOOGLE.COM
WWW.WESTLAW.COM
Palmer v. Mulligan (1805), resembled the case of Merritt v. Parker (1795), however with a different outcome. In Palmer v. Mulligan, Palmer was suing Mulligan to damages caused by his mill. Palmer’s mill burnt down and Mulligan built a new mill up river, so Palmer had to rebuild his mill further into the river in order to get enough water flow, this caused Parker to loose logs that were floating down river and he had to hire more labor to ensue this didn’t happen. Since Mulligan’s mill was upriver trash from his mill was floating down river and hitting Palmer’s mill causing damage. The court found in favor of Mulligan saying that Palmer’s problems were his own because Mulligan was not altering the flow of the river in any way, and that the “injuries” to his mill were being caused by the natural flow of the river and it was nearly ‘slight inconveniences’. (Palmer v. Mulligan 3 Cai. R. 307; 1805 N.Y. Lexis 343). This case showed the shift in favor to competition and the idea that competition was a good thing. It also demonstrated that not all interference with property would have been compensated. The law shifted to favor competition over prior appropriation. The law shifted from “sic utere” to “salus populi” reflecting that the welfare of the people should be the supreme of the law. (Salyer). It was seen that the people
The second issue is whether or not the defendant has an obligation to reimburse for an injury. The outcome of this second issue depends whether or not it is rational for the defendant to have to pa...
The tort is evident due to the negligence of Silverline Construction ltd. The following evidence can be used by the plaintiff. Below I have stated my evidence in accordance to Emma’s case.
According to the facts in this case, Walkovszky was hit by a cab four years ago in New York and the cab was negligently operated by defendant Marches. The defendant Carlton, who is being sued, owned and ran the cab company in which he set up ten corporations, including Seon. Each of the corporations had two cabs registered in its name. The minimum automobile liability insurance required by the law was $10,000. According to the opinion of the court the plaintiff asserted that he is also ?entitled to hold their stock holder personally liable for damages, because multiple corporate structures constitutes an unlawful attempt to defraud the general member of the public.?
It is highly unlikely that a court would find that Billy Jean owed Donald and Co a duty of care to avoid the purely economic loss. Pure economic loss is described as financial, monetary loss generally attributed to ‘damage’ to an individuals ‘wallet’. For a claim to be valid and considered the steps to pursue a cause of action in negligence must be followed, the first of which is establishing a duty of care owed, in this case by Billie Jean to Donald & co. In this case it is found that no duty of care is owed and thus no claim for compensation can be lodged. In an attempt to establish a duty of care the plaintiff must be deemed vulnerable under the salient factors, the plaintiff being Donald & Co which in this case are not vulnerable. This characterisation of non-vulnerability is derived from the class of sale of the property as well as numerous general assumptions as to the experience of Donald & Co. It is expected under the assumption of Caveat Emptor as well as for the magnitude of purchase that Donald & Co have access to the building records and history of inexperienced builder Billie Jean as well as the financial status of
McMahon, Bryan M. E., and Binchy, William, ‘A Case Book on the Irish Law of Torts’,
Legal studies is branched into many different sectors. One of the fundamental legal subjects is tort law. Tort law is known as the law that corrects civil wrongs. There are many different kinds of torts including tort of trespass, negligence and torts to land. Tort victims are entitled to claiming remedies, damages and injunctions. This essay will examine a case where the issues in hand are mainly negligence and occupier’s liability.
The case of Kamloops v. Nielson was a landmark decision for tort law, since it established the duty of care principle in Canadian private law, which prior to this case was used in the Anns v. Merton case and expanded the scope of duty first identified in Donoghue v. Stevenson. In the historic case of Donoghue v. Stevenson, duty of care was established to include anyone that could be foreseeably harmed by someone’s actions, creating the neighbour principle. The Anns v. Merton case expanded the scope of the neighbour principle to including public bodies, such as the municipality. The case involved a faulty building foundation, which resulting in requiring repairs for the house, and whether the municipality should have to pay for the repairs, since it was the job of the municipality to inspect and ensure the building was properly constructed. Whether public tax allocations should be subject to tort litigations was placed in question in the case but the municipality was held liable for damages nevertheless.
The paper opens with review of literature related to the study and proceeds with research framework. Then it presents research methodology along with results. The paper consummate with discussions, conclusions and limitation.
A tort is wrongful interference against a person or property, other than breaches of contract, for which the courts can rectify through legal action. The reform effort is aimed at reducing the number of unnecessary lawsuits that burden the court system while still allowing injured parties compensation when they’ve been wronged. This latest effort at tort reform has given rise to the same spirited rhetoric that might be found in a courtroom.
In our given scenario we are asked to discuss legal principles influencing the likelihood of any successful action against Steve in the grounds of negligence. Steve’s negligent driving caused a series of events that caused losses to the other people presented in the scenario and they take actions against Steve in the grounds of negligence. At first we must understand what negligence is. The tort of negligence provides the potenti...
The first point to note when analysing occupiers’ liability is that originally it was separate to the general principles of negligence which were outlined in Donoghue v Stevenson .The reason for this “pigeon hole approach” was that the key decision of occupiers’ liability, Indermaur v Dames was decided sixty six years prior to the landmark decision of Donoghue v Stevenson . McMahon and Binchy state the reason why it was not engulfed into general negligence, was because it “… had become too firmly entrenched by 1932 … to be swamped by another judicial cross-current” Following on from Indermaur v Dames the courts developed four distinct categories of entrant which I will now examine in turn.
On the 10th and 14th of August, two sentencing hearings were observed. The two hearings were held at the Brisbane Supreme Court and lasted approximately three hours in total. This essay will describe the events that occurred during both trials, while critically discussing the aspects of the hearings and linking elements to the due process and the crime control model. Overall, both trials contained more aspects of the due process model than the crime control model. This can be seen in the manner the trials were conducted in, and the emphasis of upholding the rights of the accused.
In this chapter the background and problem definition is described, that forms the basis for this research. There after the purpose, aim and research questions. Subsequently the literature review and research strategy taken to solve the research questions is given.
Sumkumar Ray, The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, Univeral Law House Publishing Co. Pvt. Ltd.