Table of Contents
Donoghue v Stevenson.
Element of Negligence
Duty of Care:
The case of Ryan v Ireland 1989
Breach of the duty of care:
The Egg-shell skull rule
In the case of Vosburg v Putney
The type of the injury:
Badger v. The minister of defence EWCH 2005
The limitation Period
David Walsh v. Jones Lang Lasalle Ltd  IEHC 28.
Chantelle woods v Department of Arts, Culture and the Gaeltacht 1)
The relevant information that has bearing on this case
What was the previous health condition of Chantelle Woods before the accident? v
What part of the building was she in? Where there any sign to say that staff and visitors are prohibited from coming in? v
Was there any caution sign placed on the steps case?
What type of foot wear was she wearing when the accident occurred? v
Has anyone ever fell from the step case before?
Was she carrying anything while climbing the steps?
Did she used the ray that was provided on the steps?
From the investigation I had done in regard to the accident Mrs Wood had at the place of work during her lunch break, I was able to get the answers to the question listed above which had bearing on this case. Mrs Woods is suffering from short sightedness which means that she had to wear her glasses at all times. The picture of Mrs Woods that was replayed form the CCTV camera show that she was walking on the steps when the accident occurred without her glasses. The spot where the accident occurs was not appropriate place provided for staffs to have their break, although the floor was wet and there was no caution sign to indicate that it was a wet floor. She had proper chosen to go there in order to have a quite place to chat with her friend on the phone. It is very obvious that the kind of shoes Mrs Wood had on can leads to a fall even when the floor is dry, as the hill was about seven inches high. This is neither easy to walk with nor climbing the steps with. Despite that the floor was wet, there was no report that anyone had fell from that steps on that particular day expect Mrs Woods. I also get to understand that Mrs Wood was struggling with a heave file with one on hand, talking on the phone and climbing the steps at the same time. The ray provided was not used by Mrs Woods because she had her hands engaged with stuff. Examine this situation there is a huge possibilities that an accident can occurs.
Negligence What is?
“Negligence can be defined as the failure to act reasonable in any circumstance to avoid causing damage or injury which is foreseeable”. (www.wikipedia.com[->0]) accessed 5/12/12 In other words it simply means harm caused by carelessness but not intentional.
Donoghue v Stevenson. This law of negligence was established in the case.
A man bought a bottle of ginger beer form a shop. The man gave the beer to his friend who drank it and found slug at the bottom of the bottle. As a result of what he saw, he had a shock and severe gastroenteritis. She took a legal action against the manufacturer.
“Analyse the rules of negligence that the manufacturer of a product owed a duty of care to the end user of their product. If they failed to exercise a reasonable duty of care in all circumstance and a person suffers loss or damage as a result of their negligence, therefore they made themselves liable for the person’s loss under negligence”. (Davenport, 2008)
Before any case can succeed under negligence the following element must be established
Element of Negligence
Duty of Care:
Is a legal obligation on the individual ensuring that they adhere to a standard of reasonable care when performing an acts they could foreseeable harm other. Everyone owes a reasonable duty of care to avoid foreseeable things...
Bibliography: Brian, Doolan (2011) Principle of Irish Law, Dublin, Gill and Macmillian
Davenport, Ruth (2008) make that grade fundamentals of Irish law, Dublin, Gill and Macmillian
Ursula, Connolly (2009) Round Hall nutshells Tort, Dublin, Thomson Reuters
[->0] - http://www.wikipedia.com
Please join StudyMode to read the full document