Case Analysis: Students are obliged to pre-prepare a two-page outline of their answers to the stated cases/problems in the given tutorial. The faculty will ask individual students to deliver an oral summary of their outline answer to the tutorial problems. These answers‚ written and oral‚ will form the basis of the tutorial proceedings. Here is a “rough guide” to the seven headings under which any case should be analyzed: 1. Case History = what was the legal basis of the claimant’s claim? When
Premium Law Supreme Court of the United States Logic
coincidentally was passing by. In this case‚ Tim can definitely claim against Danny as Danny has surely commit a tortuous action towards Tim. Tort is a French word for wrong and tort has three categories namely intentional torts‚ unintentional torts (negligence)‚ and strict liability (Cheeseman‚ 2010). This case is specifically classified as unintentional tort or negligence. The victim could claim damages sought from the offending party (Cheeseman‚ 2010). Since Tim was injured‚ he could bring a civil
Premium Tort Negligence Tort law
Negligence is a type of Tort law‚ which is a legal term that means criminal wrong‚ as opposed to a civil wrong‚ having mandatory duties for all citizens in that jurisdiction. In this law‚ the aims are deterrence‚ compensation and justice which can basically induce as protect people’s bodies and property in order to make people behave properly. Negligence placed an important role in tort law system. Apart from negligence‚ there are certain torts that specifically protect particular areas such as Defamation
Premium
[G.R. No. 117103. January 21‚ 1999] Spouses RENATO S. ONG and FRANCIA N. ONG‚ Petitioners‚ v. COURT OF APPEALS‚ INLAND TRAILWAYS‚ INC. and PHILTRANCO SERVICE ENTERPRISE‚ INC.‚Respondents. FACTS: Petitioners were paying passengers of Inland Bus (owned and operated by Inland Trailways under a Lease Agreement with Philtranco)‚ iIt was driven by Calvin Coronel. Around 3:50 a.m. on February 9‚ 1987‚ when the Inland bus slowed down to avoid a stalled cargo truck in Tiaong‚ Quezon‚ it was bumped from
Premium Appeal Law Jury
TORTS FINAL EXAM OUTLINE INTENTIONAL TORTS 3 2. Battery 3 3. Assault 3 4. Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress 3 5. False Imprisonment 4 6. Trespass 4 6.1. Trespass to Land 4 6.2. Trespass to Chattels 4 6.3. Conversion 4 AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES 5 7. Consent (Privilege) 5 8. Self Defense (Privilege) 5 8.1. Self-Defense by Force Not Threatening Death or Serious Bodily Harm 5 8.2. Self-Defense by Force Threatening Death or Serious Bodily Harm
Premium Tort Common law Law
PA-310 Unit 1 Causes of Action Tort laws are laws that offer remedies to individuals harmed by the unreasonable actions of others. Tort claims usually involve state law and are based on the legal premise that individuals are liable for the consequences of their conduct if it results in injury to others. Tort law only requires 4 elements to be shown. The first one is that the tortfeasor owes the injured party a duty to do something or not to do something; two is that tortfeasor breached the
Premium Tort
The issue is whether the defendant Sykt Jebat can be held liable for the damages suffered by the plaintiffs‚ Sam‚ Jojo and Lan under the law of Occupiers’ Liability. Occupiers’ liability concerns injury caused to a plaintiff as a result of defective condition of the land‚ building and premises. In order to establish occupiers’ liability‚ the occupier must have a sufficient degree of control over the premise. Lord Denning in Wheat v Lacon & Co Ltd (1966) held that “whenever a person has a sufficient
Premium Tort law Standard of care Duty of care
Assignment 1 Constitutional Law (LAW437) Question Habeas Corpus is a remedy to secure personal liberty in Malaysia. Discuss with reference to some decided cases. 1.1 INTRODUCTION The main provision of the Constitution which is relevant is Art. 5(1):”No person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty save in accordance with law.” This most fundamental of all fundamental-rights provisions is given to all persons‚ not just citizens. Art. 5 goes on to provide for the right to habeas
Premium Law Human rights Common law
He would like to claim for such economic loss of $50‚000. In addition‚ Peter expects to claim for medical expenses of $10‚000 and loss of income of $20‚000 for the duration of the injury. REQUIRED: Advise Peter of his legal rights under the law of torts. (Maximum word length: 1‚000 words) Question 2 (10 marks) On Monday‚ Aaron wrote a letter to Ben offering 300 bags of cement at $100 per bag. On Wednesday‚ Ben received the letter of offer from Aaron and posted a reply letter to Aaron in which
Premium Tort Week-day names
This case is in regards to the tort of negligence‚ with the central issue being causation. With the evidence provided‚ it is necessary to determine whether Vera and PC Webster are owed a duty of care and subsequently have any claims. Firstly‚ the ’but for’ test is to be applied‚ in which the courts ask: ’but for the defendant’s action‚ would the damage have occurred?’ The courts have accepted that drivers automatically owes a duty of care to every other road user ‚ including pedestrians. Jack’s
Premium Law Tort Tort law