Legal studies
Introduction
Negligence is a failure to take reasonable care to avoid causing injury or loss to another person (Law Hand Boo, 2013). Negligence can be used when a party has experienced loss or damage from the wrongful actions or omission to act of another individual. This principal can be found in The Civil Liability Act 2003(Qld). The following report will examine the tort of negligence
While analyzing the case study of Mr. Jones vs blue board production and will provide an evaluation to negligence
Describing/explaining
In order for the plaintiff to receive compensation, he or she must first successfully prove if there was a duty of care owed. This can be determined by the legal neighbor principal which applies to individuals
…show more content…
“a breach occurs when the defendant has not taken steps that a reasonable person would have taken in the circumstances in order to prevent pain or harm falling upon the plaintiff” (Herlihy, 2004, p. 291). “in order for the court to be satisfied that a duty of care has been breached, it looks at what standard of care should have been exercised by the defendant in the circumstances of the case” (Herlihy, 2004, p. 293).
The standard of care differs from case to case as the courts must determine if the standard of care was high or low in the appropriate circumstance. The court possesses these questions in order to identify the standard of care: magnitude of the risk of injury, seriousness of the possible, characteristics of the plaintiff, how beneficial the actions was to society, how practical it was to take precautions, precedent cases, whether the defendant's behavior is consistent with usual behavior, whether there is any relevant act of parliament that regulates the defendant’s behavior. In the following case, the standard of care would be considered high due to the magnitude of risk; how practical it was to take precaution and seriousness of the
…show more content…
By doing so the defendant can decrease or escape any liability. There are three defenses a defendant can use when they are found liable for negligence. These defenses are contributory negligence, where the plaintiff may have contributed to their own negligence by being careless, this can be used as a partial or complete defense; volenti, where the plaintiff had assumed the risk that caused the injury though to prove this the defendant must be able to demonstrate “that the plaintiff voluntarily consented the, and accepted that there was a degree of danger in the activity in which they were participating” (Dosen, 2013, p. 77). And the final defense is that of illegality, where damage/injury occurs while doing an illegal act. Illegality is not so much a defense as it rumors the duty of care and with no duty of care, there cannot be a breach and therefore negligence. In the case, the defendant has no
The movie “A Civil Action” released on January 8, 1999 provides viewers with an extraordinary story of the nightmare that occurred in Woburn Massachusetts in the late 1970’s. The people of this small town at the time had no idea what was going on until there were various cases of Leukemia in small children that ultimately resulted in the early passing of them. The people eventually had gone to find out that the drinking water in this small town was contaminated and there were many women that stepped in to get answers. This movie is a tremendously jaw dropping, eye opening account of a heartbreaking true story incident. There are various elements of negligence in this movie including, duty, legal cause, proximate cause and damages.
A dentist fits several children with braces. The children are regular patients of the dentist. The results for some of the patients turn out to be unacceptable and damaging. There are children who have developed gum infections due to improperly tightened braces. Some mistakenly had their permanent teeth removed, while others have misaligned bites. A local attorney becomes aware of these incidences, looks further into it, and realizes the dentist has not been properly trained and holds no legal license to practice dentistry or orthodontics. The attorney decides to act on behalf of the displeased patients and files a class action lawsuit. The attorney plans to prove the dentist negligent and guilty of dental malpractice by providing proof using the four D’s of negligence. The four D’s of negligence are duty, dereliction, direct cause and damages.
...ulations in the U.S. judicial system is “most define the law as a system of principles and processes by which people in a society deal with disputes and problems, seeking to solve or settle them without resorting to force” (p. 15). Some situations cannot be rectified in a board meeting. However, negligence is in the category of objectives of tort law, it is also the most popular lawsuit pursued by patients against medical professionals against doctors and healthcare organizations (Bal, 2009). Objectives of Tort Law
A police officer, Colin Allcars (Allcars), is suing Harry’s Ammo World (HAW) for his medical expenses, personal injuries, pain and suffering. HAW sold a rifle to Dakota D. West without checking West’s background for felonies or drug use. Federal law prevents the sale of firearms to anyone with a felony or to anyone that uses illegal drugs. Dakota had been convicted of a felony and was also a user of marijuana. Two months after the sale Dakota’s brother took the rifle and took hostages. When the police were trying to subdue and arrest Dakota’s brother he shot and wounded Colin AllCars. Allcars is suing HAW on the grounds of negligence.
Defendant must show that plaintiff failed to take reasonable care for their own safety which caused the damage. It is not necessary for plaintiff t...
The second element of the negligence is the breach of the duty of due care. By definition, “Any act that fails to meet a standard of the person’s duty of due care toward others” (Mayer et al,. 2014, p. 161). George breaches the duty of care because he did not set the parking brake, which then scraped a Prius that is driving up the road, then crosses the 6th Avenue service drive, breaks through the fencing and smashes into the light rail
The term "medical negligence" is often used synonymously with "medical malpractice," and for most purposes that's adequate. Strictly speaking though, medical negligence is only one required legal element of a meritorious (legally valid) medical malpractice claim.
For healthcare providers, there is no word that elicits as much frustration, fear and anger as much as the word “malpractice.” Medical malpractice is defined as any act or omission by a physician during treatment of a patient that deviates from accepted norms of practice in the medical community and causes an injury to the patient. Medical malpractice is a specific subset of tort law that deals with professional negligence. In order to prove that there was some type of negligence going on you must show that:
Negligence, as defined in Pearson’s Business Law in Canada, is an unintentional careless act or omission that causes injury to another. Negligence consists of four parts, of which the plaintiff has to prove to be able to have a successful lawsuit and potentially obtain compensation. First there is a duty of care: Who is one responsible for? Secondly there is breach of standard of care: What did the defendant do that was careless? Thirdly there is causation: Did the alleged careless act actually cause the harm? Fourthly there is damage: Did the plaintiff suffer a compensable type of harm as a result of the alleged negligent act? Therefore, the cause of action for Helen Happy’s lawsuit will be negligence, and she will be suing the warden of the Peace River Correctional Centre, attributable to vicarious liability. As well as, there will be a partial defense (shared blame) between the warden and the two employees, Ike Inkster and Melvin Melrose; whom where driving the standard Correction’s van.
Review the scenario below. Consider the legal principles influencing the likelihood of any successful action against Steve in negligence.
In order to constitute the act of negligence, certain elements must be fulfilled. These elements are duty of care, breach of that duty, causation and the damage is not too remote. Duty of care The claimant
Negligence is a concept that was passed from Great Britain to the United States. It arose out of common law, which is made up of court decisions that considered whether a defendant had an obligation to act with greater care. It is conduct which falls below the standard established by law for the protection of others against unreasonable risk of harm and involves a failure to fulfill a duty that causes injury to another. Many torts depend on whether there was intent but negligence does not. Negligence looks to see whether the person had a duty to act with care. It emphasizes the need for people to act reasonably in society. This is important because accidents will happen. Negligence helps the law establish whether these accidents could have been avoided, if there was a breach of duty to act reasonably, and if that breach was the cause of injury to that person. By focusing on the conduct rather than the intent of the defendant, the tort of negligence reflects society’s desire to
In both of the situations presented in the questions, the question of negligence and liability is central. Thus, we must also establish whether the potential defendants in question owed a legal duty to take care. For a defendant to be liable, they must have caused damage that is not too remote as a result of the breach of this duty. A prominent case, which sets out a test for detrmining whether or not a duty of care is owed, is Caparo v Dickman. Here, the judges determined that there must foreseeability, proximity between the parties and whether a duty is fair, just and reasonable in the circumstances.
For many years there have been questions circling weather the decision held by the house of Lords in Caparo Industries plc v Dickman [1990] 2 AC presents the return to Pre-Donoghue v Stevenson [1932] AC 562 methods applied by the courts in determining and deciding the existence of duty of care in negligence. In this assignment I will investigate cases and the methods of Pre-Donoghue v Stevenson in setting out the duty of care along with the methods set, fixed and established in Donoghue v
We Have the Right to Own Guns What is a gun’s true purpose? There is not really a right or wrong answer because guns can be used for all sorts of things, so our society should not be punished because a small percentage of gun owners use them for wrong. Citizens of the United States have the right to bear arms due to the second amendment; it is not fair to take this privilege away from everyone due to specific people’s actions. Firearms have played a primary role in America since day one, which means that the sales from guns have a substantial impact on our government's income.