Torts of negligence are breaches of duty that results to injury to another person to whom the duty breached is owed. Like all other torts‚ the requirements for this are duty‚ breach of duty by the defendant‚ causation and injury(Stuhmcke and Corporation.E 2001). However‚ this form of tort differs from intentional tort as regards the manner the duty is breached. In torts of negligence‚ duties are breached by negligence and not by intent. Negligence is conduct that falls below the standard of care
Premium Tort Duty of care Tort law
Discuss the advantages and disadvantages of the doctrine of precedent and how judges may make new law. Include 1 case where judges have made new law. The doctrine of precedent is an important feature of judge-made law (common law). This doctrine means that similar disputes should be decided by reference to the same legal principles‚ and that lower courts are bound to follow the decisions of higher courts within the same court hierarchy. There are both advantages and disadvantages of the doctrine
Premium Law Common law Precedent
this case and stated that the general duty of care described in Donoghue v Stevenson (1932) MKHL 100. It should be applied to all cases. On 26 Aug 1928‚ Mrs. Donoghue went to the Wellmeadow Cafe in Paisle‚ her friend ordered a ginger beer for her. When she was drinking the ginger beer‚ she discovered a dead snail in the bottle. Then she got severe gastroenteritis and shock. After that she sued the ginger manufacturer‚ Mr. Stevenson. The House of Lords held that the manufacturer owed a duty of
Premium Law Tort Tort law
life. Law of Torts – Negligence * Negligence is a breach of duty of care‚ which results in damage to the claimant. * Case of Donoghue v. Stevenson (1932) * Mrs Donoghue went to a cafe with a friend. The friend brought her a bottle of ginger beer and an ice cream. The ginger beer came in an opaque bottle so that the contents could not be seen. Mrs Donoghue poured half the contents of the bottle over her ice cream and also drank some from the bottle. After eating part of the ice cream‚ she
Premium Tort Duty of care
matters between two individuals and organisations. It still has the roman standard in many countries because it was originated from the Roman law. The end result is mostly damages in civil law. Example of civil cases includes Donoghue v Stevenson [1993] where Donoghue sued Stevenson for damages of £500 for drinking contaminated ginger beer which had negative effect on his health‚ Millar v Taylor (17690) is another example of civil case 5Criminal law considers crimes committed against the crown ( R
Premium Criminal law Civil law Law
Ratio decidendi and obiter dicta Learning objectives At the end of this module‚ you will be able to: * distinguish between ratio decidendi and obiter dicta. * apply well-established rules to identify the ratio decidendi in a decision. This module is intended as a useful exercise in revision. If you are certain that you understand how to discover the ratio in an opinion‚ you should skim lightly over this material. What is the ratio decidendi? As you probably recall from your studies
Premium Ratio decidendi Common law Law
draw a line to mark out the bounds of duty to protect the interests of and compensate those who have suffered a loss and injury and this is also one of the major aims of tort law. In Donoghue v. Stevenson‚ the courts judged the manufacturer of the ginger beer‚ David Stevenson of Paisley owned a duty of care to Mrs Donoghue even though there was no contract between them. In Lord Aitkin’s “neighbour” principle‚ liability should be found as long as someone failed to “take reasonable care to avoid acts or
Premium Tort Plaintiff Duty of care
“Stare Decisis” is an abbreviation of the phrase “stare decisis et non quieta movere” which translates as “to stand by decisions and not to disturb settled matters”. This principle can thus be aptly described to be that of applying the ratio decidendi of similar previous cases to that of future cases. It is important to first illustrate how the common law doctrine of stare decisis works. Vertical Stare decisis is where a decision of that of a higher court is binding on the lower courts. However
Premium Law Common law Contract
Hedley Byrne v. Heller [House of Lords] [1964] AC 465 Summary: Hedley (the appellants) were advertising agents who had provided a substantial amount of advertising on credit for Easipower. If Easipower did not pay for the advertising then Hedley would be responsible for such amounts. Hedley became concerned that Easipower would not be in a financial position to pay the debt and sought assurances from Easipower’s bank that Easipower was in a position to pay for the additional advertising
Premium Tort Duty of care Negligence
........................................................................................... 5 The Intermediate Court...................................................................................................... 5 Ratio Decidendi & Obiter Dictum ......................................................................................... 6 Types of Precedent ................................................................................................................ 7 (1) Decisions
Premium Common law Stare decisis Precedent