Worksheet 1 EMPLOYMENT TORTS Employer’s Liability 1. Introduction The basis of the liability of an employer for negligence in respect of injury suffered by his employee during the course of the employee’s work is twofold: 1. He may be liable for breach of the personal duty of care which he owes to each employee; 2. He may be vicariously liable for breach by one employee of the duty of care which that employee owes to his fellow employees. The action against the employer for
Premium Employment Tort law Tort
bus slowed down to avoid a stalled cargo truck in Tiaong‚ Quezon‚ it was bumped from the rear by another bus‚ owned and operated by Philtranco and driven by Apolinar Miralles. Both Petitioners sustained and suffered injuries‚ hence‚ they filed an action for damages against Inland and Philtranco. Philtranco answered that it exercised the diligence of a good father of a family in the selection and supervision of its drivers‚ and that the proximate cause of the accident was the negligence of either
Premium Appeal Law Jury
officers and directors duty of care under the corporations act and what consequences will be made if such breaches occur. Another issue is whether there have been any breaches of directors duties in relation to insolvent trading and what defences are available for directors who have breached their duties. And also what consequences are in order if such breaches occur. Issue 1: Breaches of a Director’s and Officer’s Duties under the Corporations Act. Director’s duties are supported by the
Premium Board of directors Corporate governance Managing director
Duty to Warn Jessica Hall PSYCH/545 09/4/2011 Dr. P. Duty to Warn The ethical dilemma I wish to explore is The Duty to Warn. This refers to the duty of a counselor‚ therapist to breach one of the most important bonds between a client and a therapist; the law of confidentiality. The therapist has the right to break confidentiality without the fear of being brought up for legal action. If the therapist believes that the client poses a danger‚ or is a threat to himself‚ someone else‚ or society
Premium Ethics Decision making Risk
get a new one and then you chip it: surely you shouldn’t compensate me because there is no extra damage caused by your action. Baker v Willoughby [1970] AC 467 (NB CONFINED TO CASES OF TWO TORTIOUS ACTS BY JOBLING): P walked into the middle of the road and D‚ driving‚ ran into him‚ causing damage to P’s leg. They both saw each other over 200 yds and neither took evasive action. The fault was ruled to be 25% P’s and 75% D’s. Shortly after the accident P was shot in the leg and it had to be amputated
Premium Tort law Injury
Whilst the commercial realities indicate that maintaining good relations with creditors‚ suppliers‚ customers and workers are all important parts of maximizing profitability‚ directors do not owe a fiduciary duty to these corporate constituencies. The novel stakeholder ideology challenges the stockholder dogma which pervades corporate management structures‚ finding expression in regional company laws. This paper analyses the statutory duty of corporate directors‚ the intricacies of the relationship
Premium Board of directors Corporation Fiduciary
Case Name: Security at TJX Problem Statement How should the new CIO of TJX work to strengthen security around the IT infrastructure to prevent‚ detect‚ and analyze security breaches that had previously allowed hackers to steal sensitive data? Background 1 Describe the company/department 1 History 1 Founded in 1976 2 Operate 8 business under TJX 1 TJ Maxx 2 Marshalls 3 HomeGoods 4 A.J Wright 5 Bob’s Stores 6 Winners 7 Home Sense 8 TK Maxx
Premium Security Security guard Physical security
speech? Introduction needed... According to the leading tort expert‚ Professor Winfield had defined defamation as: “the publication of a statement which tends to lower a person in the estimation of right-thinking members of society generally‚ or which tends to make them shun or avoid that person.” The difference between libel and slander is an important to take into account as libel can be a crime and there is always an action available. Slander‚ on the other hand‚ can be defined as ’special
Premium Tort
Q1: What is a tort? Tort: A civil wrong not arising from a breach of contract; a breach of a legal duty that proximately causes harm or injury to another. Q2: What are the four elements of negligence? They are Duty‚ Breach‚ Injury‚ and Causation. Q3: Is Shannon liable for the tort of negligence? Yes‚ she is. First of all‚ she has been told by her physician that not to drive after taking the medication. Thus she has the duty not to drive in order to take care
Premium Tort law Tort English-language films
The duty of care and the search for certainty: Sullivan v Moody‚ Cooper v Hobart‚ and problems in the South Pacific. Andrew Barker In this article‚ Andrew Barker‚ from the Faculty of Law at the University of Otago‚ considers two recent decisions on the duty of care in negligence: Sullivan v Moody‚ from the High Court of Australia‚ and Cooper v Hobart‚ from the Supreme Court of Canada. In these decisions‚ the two courts have re-evaluated their approach to the duty of care in negligence‚ and suggested
Premium Law Tort Negligence