Case Study Of The Tort Of Negligence Case

Issue:
Are the agents G Shepherd & Co. and the loose asbestos insulation assessor, Basil, liable in negligence for harm that has occurred to Roland and Belle’s family?
Relevant Rules or law:
The Tort of Negligence:
The Negligence is the failure for someone to take reasonable care to prevent foreseeable injury, loss or damage to other people. It also contains both intended and unintended acts and omission.
The Negligence action can only be liable to the plaintiff by counting the following three elements which are based on the balance of probabilities under common law and statute :
1 Duty of care
The duty of care exists in the relevant situation where risk of harm or injury to plaintiffs was ‘reasonably foreseeable’ and the plaintiff was ‘closely and directly affected’ by the defendant’s act. The injuries not only include personal injury or property damage but also the risk of purely economic loss, for example, resulting from negligent misstatements.
Whether it is the reasonable person’s response would be considered from various factors: (a) the probability of harm occurring; (b) the likely seriousness of the harm; (c) the burden of taking appropriate precautions; (d) the social utility of the activity.
3 Damage
The plaintiff’s damage, which caused by the defendant’s negligence, must be recognised by the law and not too ‘remote’ to be compensated. The “but for” text can be used to exam the causal relation between the breach and damage. However, even though the causal link exist in fact, the defendant may not be liable for the damage if the damage is not foreseeable.

Application (negligent