Tort Of Negligence Case Study

789 Words2 Pages

When something goes wrong, law will step in, in a case no one is directly at fault, otherwise negligible, one may be able to seek appropriate remedies. Negligence, A failure to act with the level of care that would be expected to do a task. There are three elements of negligence. (Lawhandbook.sa.gov.au, 2017) o Duty of Care towards One’s Legal Neighbour o Breach of Duty of Care Taken o Loss, Injury or Damages The Tort of Negligence is a legal wrong that is if one has suffered at the hands of another who fails to take “reasonable” duty of care to avoid foreseeable risks. This was first made legislation after a snail was discovered at the bottom of one’s bottle. Ms May Donoghue was given a bottle of ginger beer, which had purchased for her …show more content…

The case in which the ventilators should have been on, despite this, it was apparent, there was no duty of care to insure the ventilators be on. Given this and ‘Case law’, the case should be treated as the same as the Work experience student Vs Tho Services Limited in 2013.
Negligence is the failure to take responsible care to avoid causing an injury or fatal damages. In the case above, something did go wrong as. It was the teacher’s duty of care to supervise the student to ensure the ventilation was sufficient and are active. But despite this, it is regulatory that the spray booth be big enough to maintain aerosol in a situation vents to be off, thus it was not it was not reasonably foreseeable that the student had an unknown respiratory condition.
In the court of law, the judge decides it’s a case contributory negligence, therefore saying, “despite being tragic, the fault was 70:30 as it was not reasonably foreseeable that the student had a respiratory condition. Thus, only awarded 30% of all compensation …show more content…

This would result in compensation. In a hypothetical situation, in which a student is left in a critical condition after encountering a respiratory condition that was no known from the teacher’s perspective. Despite being tragic, the court of law decides that only 30% of the damages be awarded as it “was not reasonably foreseeable that one child would have an ‘unknown’ respiratory attack.” References
ABC News. (2017). Work exp student injured in welding accident. [online] Available at: http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-04-02/work-exp-student-injured-in-welding-accident/4604412 [Accessed 2 Sep. 2017].
Anon, (2017). [online] Available at: http://education.qld.gov.au/health/pdfs/healthsafety/drum-explosions-school-safety-alert.pdf [Accessed 2 Sep. 2017]. lawgovpol.com. (2017). Case study: Donoghue v. Stevenson (1932). [online] Available at: http://lawgovpol.com/case-study-donoghue-v-stevenson-1932/ [Accessed 2 Sep. 2017].
Lawhandbook.sa.gov.au. (2017). What is negligence?. [online] Available at: http://www.lawhandbook.sa.gov.au/ch29s05s01.php [Accessed 3 Sep. 2017].
Newcastle Herald. (2017). Hunter firm fined $240,000 for breach. [online] Available at: http://www.theherald.com.au/story/4243952/hunter-firm-fined-240000-for-breach/ [Accessed 2 Sep.

Open Document