MEMORANDUM SUBJECT: Andrew‚ personal injury‚ mental injury‚ accident compensation‚ common law action FACTS: A is a cleaner employed by the University of Ewewhon. He nicks a finger on a broken test tube on the floor of a laboratory. A small spot of blood forms. He is assured the test tube was clean. A becomes extremely fearful that the glass might have been contaminated and that he might contract a serious illness. 1.0 ISSUE: Application of the Accident Compensation Act 2001 Assuming A is
Free Injury Physical trauma Tort
Legal issues September 30‚ 2013 Case of Negligence 1. During the day‚ duct tape had been used on the floor near the boundary lines of a badminton court. In the evening‚ a participant playing badminton caught her shoe on the tape and suffered a torn meniscus in her knee. Arthroscopic surgery was required and a lengthy convalescence ensued. The municipality was responsible for cleaning the community center‚ including the gym‚ and knew that the tape had been placed on the floor during the day
Premium Badminton Association football Tort
NEGLIGENCE: THE EMPLOYER’S DUTIES Employers Liability in Negligence • May be personally liable to employees who injure themselves. • May be personally liable to employees who are injured by another employee or sometimes by an independent contractor employed by the employer. • May be vicariously liable if one employee is injured by another employee. NOTE: • Employees may also be able to recover from statutory workers compensation schemes. • Employees’ rights at common law may be restricted
Premium Tort Law Tort law
classroom is to take place of the parents whilst in school. They also must take reasonable action to decrease the likelihood of injury to students. (Queensland teachers union‚ teachers and law 5th edition page 7) Three elements to establish a negligence case A duty of care was owed There was a breach of the duty Damages occurred because of the breach Duty of Care Two points in order to establish a duty of care Should a teacher as a reasonable person foresee
Premium Tort Law Tort law
Negligence and Duty of Care Robin McClish Kaplan University Negligence and Duty of Care Scenario: As pedestrians exited at the close of an arts and crafts show‚ Jason Davis‚ an employee of the show’s producer‚ stood near the exit. Suddenly and without warning‚ Davis turned around and collided with Yvonne Esposito‚ an 80-year-old woman. Esposito was knocked to the ground‚ fracturing her hip. After hip replacement surgery‚ she was left with a permanent physical impairment. Esposito filed suit
Premium Law Tort
Contributory and Comparative Negligence Contributory and comparative negligence are legal concepts that are slightly similar in meaning. These are two separate legal concepts that minimize the liability of the defendant (McWay‚ 2010). The biggest difference between the two is that with comparative negligence there is usually some type of monetary compensation. But with contributory negligence‚ there won’t usually be any type of monetary compensation. Contributory negligence is when one person brings
Premium Tort law Tort Contributory negligence
1. NEGLIGENCE The issue is whether Moe is likely to prevail on a negligence claim against Barry. An action for negligence requires Plaintiff to prove that Defendant had a duty of reasonable care‚ Defendant breached that duty‚ the breach was the actual and proximate cause of the plaintiff’s injuries‚ and some sort of damage occurred to the plaintiff. a. Duty A general rule is that the defendant whose actions expose others to an unreasonable risk of harm owes a general duty of care to any foreseeable
Premium Tort Law Negligence
Amputation Mishap; Negligence Carmen Holder HCS/478 February 4‚ 2013 Barbara Gilbert‚ EdD‚ MSN‚ RN‚ CNE Amputation Mishap; Negligence Confused by a repeating dream‚ Joseph Benson wakes up and realizes the wrong leg was amputated. Even under the best of circumstances‚ mishaps such as this one do occur as a result of negligence and cause unnecessary duress to patients. This paper will discuss the difference between negligence‚ gross negligence‚ and malpractice. I will present my opinion of
Premium Nursing Standard of care Duty of care
Christopher’s actions when acting on impulse drives the plot of the story majorly. The first place we see Christopher’s actions drive the plot is when Christopher finds Wellington the poodle belonging to Mrs. Shears‚ his neighbor‚ dead on Mrs. Shear’s lawn with a garden fork through its side. Christopher touches the dog’s muzzle and observes that it is still warm. Automatically‚ he wonders who killed Wellington‚ and why. Acting on impulse‚ Christopher removed the garden fork and picked up Wellington
Premium Police Police officer Murder
Aspects of Contract and Negligence for Business Table of Contents Introduction 3 CONTRACT BEGINNINGS 3 MAJOR CONTRACT ELEMENTS 3 CONTRACT FORMATION 5 CONTRACT TERMS AND REMEDIES 6 CONTRACT EXEMPTION……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………8 NEGLIGENCE PRINCIPLES………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….9 NEGLIGENCE DEFENCES………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….11 VICARIOUS LIABILITY 1 NEGLIGENCE REMEDIES 13 EMPLOYER LIABILITY‚ HEALTH
Premium Contract Tort Common law