Unit 003 Introduction to duty of care in health‚ social Care or children’s and young people’s settings Outcome 1 Understand the implications of duty of care 1.1. Define the term ‘duty of care’ Duty of care is the legal duty to take reasonable care so that others aren’t harmed. It is a requirement that a person acts toward others and the public with watchfulness‚ attention and caution that a reasonable person in the circumstances would. If a person’s actions do not meet this standard of care
Premium Law Negligence Core issues in ethics
4 2.10 Vulnerability 5 3.00 The Elements of Negligence 6 3.10 Duty of Care 6 3.20 Breach of Duty of Care 7 3.30 Causation 7 3.40 Remoteness of Damages 7 4.00 Statutory changes to
Premium Negligence Tort Tort law
Nicolette (#25) G12 Throughout the course of this report‚ to determine if the plaintiff is owed a duty of care in negligence‚ we will adhere by the Singapore single test of negligence laid out in the case of Spandeck Engineering (S) Pte Ltd v Defence Science & Technology Agency [2007] SGCA 37; [2007] 4 SLR 100‚ which states that the following factors must be satisfied in order for a duty of care in negligence to arise: 1) Test for factual foreseeability 2) Test for proximity
Premium Tort Tort law Negligence
negligence where the facts are so obvious that somebody must be negligent otherwise the accident would not have happen. In the common law of negligence‚ the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur (Latin: the thing speaks for itself) states that the elements of duty of care and breach can be sometimes inferred from the very nature of the accident‚ even without direct evidence of how any defendant behaved. Where all that the Plaintiff can show is that he suffered injury. To deal with such difficult case where
Premium Tort law Tort Duty of care
The dispute that occurred among the individuals had caused potential trespass to person claims. Trespass to person tort is involved in intentional‚ direct interference to claimants and is branched into three elements: assault‚ battery and false imprisonment. Phil could claim assault against Grant due to him coming at him in an aggressive manner and for throwing a bottle at him. However Phil could also possibly be prosecuted for Battery‚ from Grant’s girlfriend‚ because of the unlawful kiss he enforced
Premium Negligence Tort Tort law
describe the law of negligence and occupier’s liability‚ economic loss and psychiatric loss. Negligence is when somebody has a duty of care and that duty is breached. Negligence is split into 3 parts. Duty of Care In certain situations‚ a duty of care is owed to another person. For example‚ a surgeon owes a duty of care to whoever they operate on. The existence of a duty of care is established by the Neighbour Test which was brought in by Lord Aitken after the Donoghue v Stevenson case; In the
Premium Tort Tort law Negligence
Bibliography: * Latimer P Australian Business Law‚ 31st ed‚ 2012‚ ¶4-090 Recognised duties of care. P231 * Civil Liability Act 2002 (NSW) s 5B (1) (2) * Domestic Animals Act 2000 (ACT) Division 2.6 45 * Cooke J Law of Tort Ninth Edition‚ 9thed‚ 2009‚ C1 General Principle of Tort Law. P6 * Jones L Introduction to Business Law 1st‚ 2011
Premium Tort Tort law Negligence
sale to its customer Buick. In turn‚ it was Buick’s responsibility to inspect the product for defect before sale to the dealerships who in turn would sell to the ultimate purchasers in general public. Since automobiles are inherently dangerous‚ a duty of care is owed to the ultimate purchasers. 2. Buick argued that this was the only wheel out of 60‚000 sold that had been shown defective. Should 1/60‚000 be sufficient to establish negligence? With the set of circumstances that exist in this
Premium Tort Duty of care Manufacturing
and Coal Co ltd v McMullan‚ as being‚ i) the existence of a duty of care owed by the defendant to the claimant; ii) a breach of that duty; iii) damage or injury caused by that breach of duty. Each aforesaid area must be examined‚ and principally established in each separate claim against the defendant‚ for any proceedings against the defendant to be successful. To start‚ the first task is to identify and define the range to whom a duty of care is owed. Negligence is essentially concerned with compensating
Premium Tort Negligence Injury
plaintiff must prove is that the defendant owed him or her legal duty of care. Generally‚ this duty of care is a legal notion that states that people owe anyone around them or anyone who could be around them a duty to not place them in situations of undue risk of harm. Proving this element will largely depend on the facts of the situation. After the plaintiff has proved that a legal duty of care existed‚ he or she must then prove that this duty was breached. Generally‚ courts will use the standard of
Premium Tort Tort law Law