Chapter five is about Ethical and legal implications of practice. These are both important topics in the healthcare field. It is important to make ethical choices and understand the legal implications of the choices that you make. In this paper I will write about Ethical theories and principles‚ ethical viewpoints and decision making‚ and also the legal issues affecting respiratory care. Ethical theories and principles provide the foundation for all ethical behavior. Contemporary ethical principles
Premium Health care provider Ethics Health care
SERGIO F. NAGUIAT‚ doing business under the name and style SERGIO F. NAGUIAT ENT.‚ INC.‚ & CLARK FIELD TAXI‚ INC.‚ petitioners‚ NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION (THIRD DIVISION)‚ NATIONAL ORGANIZATION OF WORKINGMEN and its members‚ LEONARDO T. GALANG‚ et al.‚ respondents. FACTS: Naguiat is the president and a stockholder of Clark Field Taxi‚ Inc. (CFT). Due to the phase-out of the US bases in the country‚ Clark Air Base was closed and the taxi drivers of CFTI were separated from service.
Premium Common law Tort Legal terms
- 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 danger i.e. fix the fence If the presence of trespassers is known or foreseeable‚ step must be taken Case – Paris Vs Stepney Borough Council
Premium Tort law Tort Law
Duty of care is a requirement that a person act towards the public with caution and attention. If a person’s actions do not meet this standard of care‚ then the acts are considered negligent and any damages resulting may be claimed in a lawsuit for negligence. 3.0 The summary of case : Donoghue V Stevenson Summary of the case “Donoghue V Stevenson”. On the 26 August 1928‚ Donoghue took a train to Paisley to meet her friend in Wellmeadow Café. Her companion ordered and paid for a pear and ice cream
Premium Duty of care Tort Law
Section A Question 1) a) In the case of Donohue v Stevenson[1]‚ Donohue won the case. The ratio decidendi in the case was that the liability of negligence did not depend on the contractual relationship and that Stevenson owed the duty of care to Donohue as a manufacturer‚ not to cause foreseeable injuries to the users of the products. As there was an owed duty‚ Stevenson failed to practice the appropriate standard of care and in turn‚ the negligent act had caused the injuries to Donohue. Therefore
Premium Contract Contract law Tort
at hand. There are also several ways that the plaintiff can be compensated for the actions that are being brought about by the complaint. A negligence tort against Jason Davis was brought on by Ms Yvonne Esposito regarding duty of care. Ms Esposito was knocked down while trying to exit the premise of the arts and craft show that she had attended Negligence is defined as an unintentional tort and occurs when someone is injured because of the failure of someone else. Duty of care is the obligation
Premium Tort Law Negligence
generally‚ officers are not liable for torts committed by its agents. Agents that commit a tortious act (criminal‚ punishable‚ etc.)‚ however‚ can be personally liable along with the principle. For this case‚ the agent‚ Greg Allen‚ was accused of negligence and the Estelle’s’ filed a suit against him as well as the corporation. According to Miller & Jentz‚ the corporation is liable for torts committed by its agents or officers within the scope of their employment. The liability would fall on the corporation
Premium Tort Contract Negligence
ISSUE: Is the Timberlakes own the negligent for duty of care? Should the Timberlakes put public authorities? Should the Timberlakes take occupier’s liabilities? Is there a loss making event for Lindsey Loharn? Law: Law of Tort—The tort of negligence—Duty of care/ public authorities/ occupier’s liabilities. Duty of care: SWAIN v WAVERLEY MUNICIPAL COUNCIL (2005) public authorities: Nagle v Rottnest Island Authority (1993) occupier’s liabilities: Australian Safeway Stores Pty Ltd v Zaluzna
Premium Tort Law Negligence
ISSUE Is the defendant negligent and liable for injuries to the plaintiff? RULES In negligence‚ a plaintiff must prove: duty; breach duty; causation; and actual injury. Cite A person owes a heightened duty of care where children may be present. Cite ANALYSIS In Aarons v. Peterson‚ the defendant kept a hammer and nails in a toolbox on the floor of his basement. His eleven-year-old son took the hammer and a nail from the toolbox to repair a knock hockey board that he and his nine-year-old
Premium Law Tort Tort law
of doing things on their own but are in your care. If there is a basketball session and the floor is not dry or hasn’t been dried properly and a child slips and has an injury the person that is caring for the child in the session can be sued for negligence. It’s the duty of the carer to make sure it’s safe to play in a certain activity. Higher duty of care- is for people that are less able of doing basic things daily on their own (young people and children) Higher duty of care is similar to duty of
Premium Law Core issues in ethics Duty of care