Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Vicarious liability case study
Vicarious liability case study
Vicarious liability tort
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Vicarious liability case study
Tort, is a critical subject of study when analyzing common law jurisdictions. Tort, latin word for wrong, is the action of causing harm or loss to another person or party [1]. When there is an act of tort, the person who has committed the tortious act is called the tortfeasor while the person who suffered harm or loss from such act is called the injured party or the victim. Despite crimes may be torts, torts may not be crimes [1] simply because a tort may not have broken a law so it does not amount to criminal offense. In fact, one must understand that the main idea of tort is not to punish the perpetrator but rather to compensate the people who suffered from the act [1].
There are three elements when determining whether an act is tortious
…show more content…
is vicarious liability. Vicarious liability essentially is when someone is held responsible for the tortious act of another person, typically seen in the workplace where an employer is generally held responsible for his/her employee’s action during their course of employment [3]. In the case study, this liability is evident as an employee of Acme Underground did not fully test the conditions of the sub-surface [6]. This indicates a vicarious liability may be possible because the employee was simply following order to conduct test for sub-surface conditions of the bridge site. In fact, Dutton V. Bognor Regis United Building Co. Ltd. case in 1972 [5] can effectively show such liability is indeed present in the case study. Summarizing the precedent case, a house was built on a rubbish deposit which requires larger foundation [5]. The foundation must be approved by an inspector by law, however, the inspector failed to properly inspect the foundation and part of the building collapsed [5]. The final verdict of this case was that the building inspector and the building authority are both liable [5]. This case clearly indicates that although the higher up was not directly related to the incident, he/she may still be responsible for the employee’s mistake which is a matching circumstance to the facts given in the case study. Thus, the employee of Acme Underground may have made a mistake in his work, but since it is in the …show more content…
may face is economic loss. This is because Acme Underground Ltd. owes a duty of care to provide correct report of the sub-surface conditions to Mr.Sharp and the Municipality. Yet, they breach such duty when Subsurface Wizard determined that Acme Underground has made a significant error by not fully testing the soil. This caused the Municipality 350 thousand dollars extra to build the revised design [6]. However, this is not possible for the Municipality to pay because they stated to Mr.Sharp that it is not economically feasible for them to build the bridge if it costed more than 1.8 million dollars [6]. Since the Municipality contracted ABC Construction, they cannot breach the contract to stop the construction either. The 1982 precedent case, Junior Books Ltd. v. Veitchi Co. Ltd. [5], displays another example of how someone’s negligence can cause economic damages. In the precedent case, a negligently laid floor, not dangerous, caused the plaintiff to suffer numerous losses such as replacing the floor and business disturbance [4]. The defendant was later found liable and must pay the plaintiff for the profit loss of the time [4]. It is evident from this case that one can be found liable because of his/her negligent act. This is clearly displayed by Acme Underground as their negligence with the sub-surface conditions report caused the Municipality to suffer an economic loss. Therefore, Acme Underground Ltd. is highly
UST Inc. is a dominant player in the smokeless tobacco industry. We have been tasked with weighing the cost and benefits of having leverage in their capital structure and to advise the CEO whether or not to go ahead with the recapitalization. After solving for UST’s credit ratings and value given three different stock buyback scenarios, $700 million, $1 billion, and $1.5 billion, we would suggest that UST move forward with the recap at $1 billion.
Engineers, contractors, and other businesses must be mindful of and knowledgeable of their legal obligations when performing their occupation or supplying a product. Negligence in the design or construction of a product that results in damage or bodily harm, or could result in damage or bodily harm, can result in liability for economic loss under Canadian Tort law. Engineers, architects, and contractors need to be respectful of their duty of care to ensure their product is precisely produced with no danger of negligence.
Mamo v Surace (“Mamo”) examines fault and finality, in the context of an unavoidable accident. Definitional discussion emerges within the idea of “fault”, with the outcomes ultimately furthering the legal avenues of victims of blameless accidents, enabled by the separation of non-tortious negligence and “fault”. Notably, the dismissal of arguments raised at appeal furthers the notion that circumstantially, injustice must be endured for the sake of finality, to avoid greater an injustice inflicted upon the opposing counsel .
Vicarious liability is a common law concept that refers to the liability that arises when one party, such as an employer, is legally liable for the acts or omissions of another party, such as an employee. This is because employers have a duty to take reasonable care for the safety of their employees and those of others who come into contact with them and their business.
Criminal law attempts to balance the rights of individuals to freedom from interference with person or property, and society’s need for order. Procedural matters, the rights of citizens and powers of the state, specific offences and defences, and punishment and compensation are some of the ways society and the criminal justice system interact.
In this essay about tort law, I talked about a tort case that has personally impacted me. To do this, I provided a background of the event, applied facts of the case to applicable law, summarized lessons of the week as they related to this case and provided a plausible argument for the parties involved. This is a prime example of breach of a tort law and the case is currently in the process of litigation. It is likely that the parties involved will reach an agreement out of court but may in fact be brought to trial.
Liability for negligence is a civil matter. In liability negligence, the victim has to be able to prove that the defendant has legal obligations, and the obligations was breached, and that they have received foreseeable harm as a consequence of the negligence alleged. If the victim can prove that there was a breach of a legal obligation then he/she will be awarded damages based on the basis of the harm caused or loss sustained.
after suffering harm from the acts of the other party (Turner, 2013). A tort is a civil wrong
The construction site was in a downtown area of a large southeastern city, criss-crossed with city streets, utilities, and immediately adjacent to mid-rise and high rise buildings. Nearly all of the work was required to be constructed within temporary piling structures to limit settlement of adjacent structures. The construction contract called for seven phase releases of work areas and nine completion milestones, each milestone has its own liquidated damages penalty. The construction contract was valued at $10 million, and the duration was 545 calendar days. Following the completion of the work, the contractor filed a claim for $5.5 million and 1.1 million in interest. The authority subsequently denied the claim and the contractor, in accordance with the contract, filed an arbitration demand with the American Arbitration Association. Following the contractor’s issuance of the demand letter, the parties agreed to resolve the dispute through negotiation” (Ray,
Based on the evaluation, all three engineers made an unethical decision to ignore the proper handling, regulations, and procedures of the hazardous wastes they were working with which put the welfare of the environment, general public, and co-workers at jeopardy and should, therefore, be held accountable and criminally responsible for their negligence in accordance to the Resource Conservation Recovery Act.
I say this because Owen knew the holes were there. He knew and did not fix them. Property owners owe a duty. He should have his property fixed. Polly’s husband can sue for loss of consortium which is a claim for damages suffered by the spouse or a family member of a person who has been injured or killed as a result of the defendant’s negligent or intentional, or otherwise wrongful acts. The husband can also claim for wrongful death claim. Wrongful death claim is claimed by the victims spouse or loved ones who was killed by someone else’s negligent behavior or intentional act. This lawsuit is normally brought against the person or persons who are responsible for the death. The husband can also sue for emotional distress which is a negative emotional reaction that includes fear, anger, and anxiety endured by the victim of a tort. Monetary damages will be
The Complaint asserts a cause of action for construction negligence and professional liability against Cives. Further, Lend Lease is asserting a counterclaim against Cives based on a professional liability theory. The claim against Cives is the connection at issue should have been bolted, or that Cives should have more prominently called out the fact the connection was to be field welded in its erection drawings together with indicating temporary support was required. Further, it is alleged schematic on the S-drawings, which MKA prepared, required the connection be bolted.
During the evaluation of the events in each topic area there are some legal terms that may need to be defined. These terms may also be defined differently depending on the state that the event occurs in. At the end of this paper there is a list of definitions that describe what a certain legal action could mean. All forms of government view these definitions similarly, however, each state may have differing consequences for each of the crimes.
The primary function of negligence law aims to protect civilians and prevent any form of loss or harm to an individual. Negligence law has ultimately developed to adequately protect the welfare of society and citizens equitably. In order to prove an individual of negligence it is imperative a duty of care was owed, breached, was foreseeable and an injury or loss resulted. Negligence can occur in many aspects of professional practices and the standard is one of a reasonable level of care, determined in a court of law. The law of negligence will continue to progress due to the boundless sophistication of a globalised society and has been paramount within professional duties to ensure public safety.
From the 1990s, the reports that cover the compensation cases increased dramatically in the mass media (Almond, 2004). There is a view that a huge number of tort cases in the ‘compensation culture’ are unjustified and unfair. In the mid-1990s, the term ‘compensation culture’ first appeared in a famous British newspaper (Levin, 1993). Actually, this is an extreme view, which will be criticized in this paper. This essay emphasizes the compensation culture is a myth (Morris, 2007). There are three reasons: Firstly, the data of the tort claims declined in recent years. Secondly, some victims do not receive the compensation or enough compensation that they deserve. Thirdly, the mass media and public organizations created the ‘compensation