Table of Contents: Page Number Outcome-1………………………………………………………………….3 Outcome-2………………………………………………………………….5 Outcome-3………………………………………………………………….6 Outcome-4………………………………………………………………….8 Bibliography………………………………………………………………...10 Outcome 1: Before describing Bill and James legal position according to their activities‚ the formation of a contract has given below in Figure 1: [pic] By the formation of contract‚ the legal position of Bill
Premium Contract Tort law Tort
Definition: A tort‚ in common law jurisdictions‚ is a civil wrong which unfairly causes someone else to suffer loss or harm resulting in legal liability for the person who commits the tortious act‚ called a tortfeasor. Tort is derived from the latin word “Tortum”. Although crimes may be torts‚ the cause of legal action is not necessarily a crime as the harm may be due to negligence which does not amount to criminal negligence. The victim of the harm can recover their loss as damages in a lawsuit
Premium Common law Tort Tort law
care is owed‚ ! b) that the duty of care has been breached and ! c) that the breach caused damage which is not too remote from the breach! Requirement 1:! Duty of care Wether the defendant owed the plaintiff a duty of care is a question of law. The onus is on the plaintiff to establish the existence of the duty of care. ! ! - ! ! Motorists owe a duty of care to other road user “Imbree v McNeilly" ! Doctors owe a duty of care to their patients “Roger v Whitaker” ! Solicitors
Premium Tort law Duty of care Tort
disclosures: s156(1)&(5) Duty to retain discretions Duty to avoid conflicts of interests Duty to use powers for a proper purpose Duty to act in good faith in the interests of the company Liability for fraudulent trading: s 340(1) General law Duties Loyalty and good faith THE DUTIES Care and diligence Duty to act honestly and to use reasonable diligence: s 157(1) Statutory Duties Duty to act with reasonable care and diligence Administrative duties: Eg general disclosure:
Premium Law Tort Tort law
Product Liability Law Outline I. Introduction Imagine getting the same old dog or cat food for your pet that you always get and all of a sudden your pet gets sick and dies. Is this a case that can be filed against the business you bought the food from‚ the company that made the food‚ or both? Should companies be held accountable to a higher degree? II. Definition of Product Liability Business Law: The Ethical‚ Global‚ and E-Commerce Environment
Premium Law Tort Tort law
and consent by the other so to act”. A party who employs another person to act in his behalf and subject is called a Principal. A party who agrees to act on behalf of another is called an Agent. Agency is governed by a large body of common law known as agency law. Eg: A real estate broker who is employed to sell a house. 2. What are the duties of a Principal to its Agent? A Principal owes following duties to its agent: * Duty to compensate: A principal owes a duty to compensate an agent
Premium Negligence Tort Contract law
Lecture 14 Tort Re Ipsa Loquitur & Defence to Negligence res ipsa loquitur- the facts speak for themselves It means that the plaintiff can prima facie establish 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
Premium Tort law Tort Duty of care
Issue: Whether directors of ABC Bhd had breach their duty as directors. Whether ABC Bhd can persue their claim against any other party related to ABC Bhd. Law: S.4(1) Company Act 1965 (CA1965) states that director includes any person occupying the position of director of a corporation by whatever name called and includes a person in accordance with whose directions or instructions the directors of a corporation are accustomed to act and an alternate of substitute director. For example‚ in the case
Premium Contract Tort law Fiduciary
Case – British Railways board Vs Herrington Relevance - Trespasser duty of care - Common humanity - Occupiers liability act 1984 Facts - Railway line operated by BRB ran through property open to public - Fences were in poor repair - 1965 children seen on line - Child severely injured when he stepped on line after passing through broken fence - Plaintiff claimed damages for negligence Ruling - House of lords held over trespassers‚ a duty to take steps as common humanity to avert
Premium Tort law Tort Law
HI 5018 BUSINESS LAW Week 4 Application of Negligence to Business Chapter 9 Applications of Negligence to Business Chapter objectives On completion of this chapter‚ you should be able to: identify and discuss the application of the tort of negligence to the following: a) occupier’s liability b)strict liability c) negligent misstatements d)employer or vicarious liability e) breach of statutory duty f) criminal negligence HI 5018 BUSINESS LAW T2 2014 3 3 1 Chapter objectives On completion
Premium Law Tort law Tort