Duty of Care
Duty of Care: GELERAL
Week 2::Seminar 2
This concept is based on three proof of elements, its ingredients are – A legal Duty of D towards the C to exercise care in such conduct of D as falls within the scope of the duty, Breach of that Duty means failure to come up to the standard required by law & Consequential damage to C which can be attributed to D’s conduct.
Duty of Care General: Duty is the primary control device which allows the courts to keep liability for negligence within what they regard as acceptable limits and the controversies which have centered around the criteria for the exercise of a duty reflect differences of opinion as to the proper ambit of liability for negligence. Before Donoghue v Stevenson, there was no liability for negligence in a case where there is no special relationship between parties. Because in Case of Assault or Battery or Defamation where someone has some certain restrictions that the D must not do by the law. But in a case of Pure negligence it was uncertain, so the court used to impose duties only where D & C had some kind of relations such as relation with a Doctor to his patient or a Lawyer to his client and so on. In this sense the Setevenson case was unique because in that case X bought Beer for his friend from a Shop and while drinking that his friend Y found that there was a snail and Y became seriously ill. The question to the court was as there was no relation existed between the Manufacturer and Y how they could impose a duty in such a situation. Furthermore because of the principle of Privity Y could not sue the Shop hence she had no contractual relations with the shop. However the House of Lords by majority discovered that there was a duty. And how it worked we come know form the dicta of Lord Atkin. His Lordship stated that, manufacturers has a duty because Y was neighbor by law of the manufacturer, and everyone has duty by law toward their neighbors not to harm them. Court said one must not injured
Week 2::Seminar 2
This concept is based on three proof of elements, its ingredients are – A legal Duty of D towards the C to exercise care in such conduct of D as falls within the scope of the duty, Breach of that Duty means failure to come up to the standard required by law & Consequential damage to C which can be attributed to D’s conduct.
Duty of Care General: Duty is the primary control device which allows the courts to keep liability for negligence within what they regard as acceptable limits and the controversies which have centered around the criteria for the exercise of a duty reflect differences of opinion as to the proper ambit of liability for negligence. Before Donoghue v Stevenson, there was no liability for negligence in a case where there is no special relationship between parties. Because in Case of Assault or Battery or Defamation where someone has some certain restrictions that the D must not do by the law. But in a case of Pure negligence it was uncertain, so the court used to impose duties only where D & C had some kind of relations such as relation with a Doctor to his patient or a Lawyer to his client and so on. In this sense the Setevenson case was unique because in that case X bought Beer for his friend from a Shop and while drinking that his friend Y found that there was a snail and Y became seriously ill. The question to the court was as there was no relation existed between the Manufacturer and Y how they could impose a duty in such a situation. Furthermore because of the principle of Privity Y could not sue the Shop hence she had no contractual relations with the shop. However the House of Lords by majority discovered that there was a duty. And how it worked we come know form the dicta of Lord Atkin. His Lordship stated that, manufacturers has a duty because Y was neighbor by law of the manufacturer, and everyone has duty by law toward their neighbors not to harm them. Court said one must not injured