attendant in a children’s playground and his job requires that he act as wicket keeper for the children when they play cricket. Jack’s one good leg is seriously injured when a fast ball crashes into him. He sues the employing Council alleging breach of duty in failing to provide protective guards. Discuss the general nature of care and discuss whether Jack Smith’s common law action would be affected by the fact that he previously had only one good leg. Further state whether he can recover damages
Premium Contract Tort Duty of care
summoned aid for an imperiled stranger. Under the American Bystander Rule a person would have to have the legal duty to act or aid‚ and be required to do so‚ if they are employed in some helping occupation‚ or if they have some other legal obligation which requires them to act a special‚ or familial‚ relationship with a person in distress. In the United States‚ individuals do not have a duty to intervene when someone else is in danger. This is known as the American bystander rule and is different from
Premium Good Samaritan law Obligation Criminal law
application of s 5R of the Civil Liability Act 2002 (NSW) can be seen from the case Mak Woon King v Wong Chiu [2000] 2 HKLRD 295. Application Applying the three essentials of negligence to find out if Peter has been negligent: 1) Peter Owed Mary a duty of care as he is supposed to care for all other road users 2) Peter breached the standard of care of a reasonable person‚ as a reasonable person would not be negligent while driving and would not change his CD 3) Due to Peter’s negligent harm
Premium Tort Tort law Duty of care
Plaintiff‚ Priscilla. [Note: The Employee of Vogue Beauty Salon‚ Veronica was vicariously liable for the damages of her actions.] Relevant Law and Application 1 Did the Defendant owe the Plaintiff a duty of care? As per Donogue V Stevenson‚ the law states that the defendant owe the plaintiff a duty of care if the negligent act causes physical or psychological injury to person or damage to property. It therefore must fulfill these two tests.
Premium Law Tort law Duty of care
Reflection of the Professional Issue in Nursing As a nurse‚ I make judgement that would affect patient’s health every day‚ I am aware that I have a great duty to ensure my patient’s safety to maintain the public trust (Chitty & Black‚ 2011). After learning this module‚ it helped me acquire adequate knowledge to better manage legal and ethical issues at work. For the sake of providing a high quality of care to my patients‚ I must be knowledgeable in both (Croke‚ 2003). Nowadays‚ the public
Premium Duty of care Standard of care Medical malpractice
Breach of duty Breach of duty is defined as when defendant has fallen below the standard of care required by law. Once it has been established that the defendant owed the claimant a duty of care‚ the claimant must prove that the defendant was in breach of duty. ------------------------------------------------- A breach of duty occurs when defendant has not taken care‚ i.e. has been negligent. STANDARD OF CARE Breach of duty in negligence liability is decided by the objective test‚ i.e. the defendant
Premium Tort Tort law Negligence
1. This is an appeal brought by Miss Sandra Johnson and others (original claimants) against the decision of the Court of Appeal. The action under review is whether the two Respondents‚ Express Bus Company (EBC) Ltd and Blasts Ltd‚ were in breach of duty of care to the deceased and injured children. 2. It is worth explaining at the outset of this judgment about the definition of negligence. Negligence is the omission to do something which a reasonable man‚ guided upon those considerations which ordinarily
Premium Reasonable person Reasonable person Res ipsa loquitur
person’s or organisation’s duty to take reasonable care in the circumstances‚ which causes harm to a person or organization. It is a manner that involves harm caused by carelessness‚ not intentional harm. For negligence to occur‚ the plaintiff will need to prove that the three factors are present; these being‚ the defendant owes a duty of care to the plaintiff‚ the defendant failed in his duty and finally‚ there must be damage to the plaintiff caused by the breach of the duty of care. Medical negligence
Premium Tort Law Negligence
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
following: • the defendant owes the plaintiff a duty of care • the defendant has failed to comply with the required standard of care • there has been material damage to the plaintiff • damage caused by the defendant is not too remote Duty of care As‚ for the first time‚ demonstrated in the case of Donoghue v Stevenson ‚ negligence may exist despite there being no direct relationship between two parties. After the Shaddock’s Case ‚ the duty of care was extended to include the giving of information
Premium Tort Contract Reasonable person