Tort of Negligence Damage and Injury In order for a claim of tortuous liability in negligence to be actionable‚ primarily‚ certain fundamental pre-requisites need to be established in each case respectively. The requirements of the modern tort of negligence were stated by Lord Wright in‚ Lochgelly 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
Premium Tort Negligence Injury
Law AY 2011-2012‚ Term 1 Group 8 Project Written Analysis Tort of Negligence Prepared for: Professor Melvyn Chew Written By: Jamie Lim Jia Qi (#12) Joel Koh Yong Kiat (#14) Low Hwan Hong (#23) Oh Zhan Yuan (#24) Ong Hui Ming Maria 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
Premium Tort Tort law Negligence
Question 1 What legal issues does this situation raise and what are the possible legal consequences? Issue 1--duty of care The tort of negligence to be constituted depend on whether the defendant violate the principle of ‘Duty 0f Care’. Because of the case of Donoghue v Stevenson [1]‚ ‘Duty 0f Care’ has been established in common law: 1. Defendant whether or not fulfill the duty of care. 2. That defendant whether or not breached that duty. 3. whether Breach the duty of care is the main
Premium Tort law Law Negligence
found negligent by having a water spill on the floor. However‚ the factors of the time frame‚ that the spill was open and obvious‚ and that Trina did not know of the spill could remove her negligence. Additionally‚ Karen Logan was contributorily negligent here‚ absolving Trina of any negligence claim. Negligence To be negligent‚ the condition of defendant’s property must present an unreasonable risk of harm to people on the property. Here‚ the puddle of water in the middle of the floor was not
Premium Tort law Common law Tort
the facts of this case‚ using the information found in the case in LexisNexis. (5 points) The facts of the case found in LexisNexis is: a child was burnt‚ not determined if the coffee was served scolding hot or not‚ no breach of warranty‚ and no negligence of emotional damage. 4. According to the case‚ why was this not a case of negligent infliction of emotional distress‚ and what tort did the court approve? (5 points) The court did approve punitive damages but Burger King had nothing to do with
Premium Negligence Product liability 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 is the breech of an obligation or duty to act with care‚ or failure to act as a reasonable or prudent person under certain circumstances. Actual loss or harm must occur in order for negligence to be considered. If loss or harm has occurred as a result of negligence‚ the act is considered a tort‚ and damages may be recovered ( money or form of compensation awarded by law as the result of the negligent action). Torts are willful or unintentional wrong doings committed by one individual
Premium Law Tort Negligence
Questions: 1. Define Negligence or Culpa. 2. What are the kinds of Negligence? 3. What are the successive rights of the creditors to satisfy the claims of his debtors? Answers to Questions: NEGLIGENCE Negligence‚ also known as Culpa‚ is the failure to observe for the protection of the interests of another person‚ that degree of care‚ precaution and vigilance which the circumstances justly demand‚ whereby such other person suffers injury. Negligence can also be defined as: The omission
Premium Contract Criminal law Negligence
firms are usually hesitant to take on clinical negligence cases as they would incur very large pre-action costs before the likelihood of the success of the claim can even be determined. Therefore‚ many claimants are usually unable to make an SFA with a solicitor‚ especially if the claim is of low value. Therefore‚ many claimants are unable to purse their claim and have no access to
Premium Common law Law Medicine
Police Negligence and Liability 1 Running Head: Police Neglect/Liability Police Negligence and Liability Police Negligence and Liability 2 Abstract The purpose of this paper is to examine factors involved in police negligence and the extent of liability the officers hold. Are police officers held accountable for their misjudgments or reckless behavior when they are at fault? This paper exams relevant cases in which police officers have been
Premium Police Tort Tort law