NEGLIGENCE I: The legal issue here is whether Defendant is negligent towards Plaintiff R: To prove negligence‚ P must prove 3 elements: (1) duty of care; (2) breach of duty of care; (3) causation &remoteness. I. DUTY OF CARE I: Prove physical injury/ not (Neither his body nor Properties were damaged) - Therefore‚ the legal issue is whether D owed P a DOC for... II. BREACH OF the DUTY OF CARE: I: The legal issue is whether D failed to meet the standard of care to P R: A D has breached
Premium Tort law Tort Law
1 Chapter 2 Chapter 3 Chapter 4 Chapter 5 Chapter 6 Chapter 7 Chapter 8 Chapter 9 Chapter 10 Chapter 11 Chapter 12 Chapter 13 Introduction Negligence: basic principles Negligence: duty of care and breach of duty Negligence: causation and remoteness of damage Negligence: special problems Negligence: particular relationships Breach of statutory duty Particular statutory regimes: strict liability Intentional injuries to the person Interference with economic interests The law of nuisance and the rule
Premium Tort Common law Law
and Don [Hedley Byrne v Heller] Representor has reasonable grounds to believe his statement was true. Is a term; as Chew would not invest in the bonds if not for Don’s words. Sue for negligent misrepresentation (Using “But-for” test to assess damages) Suing under the Tort of Negligence‚ Chew has to prove: Duty of Care owed to Chew by Don - Factual Foreseeability‚ proximity checked Hedley Byrne v Heller (1964) - Negligent misstatement results economic loss Skill & Expertise of Don Don knows/ought
Premium Tort Tort law Negligence
of care‚ breach of duty and resulting non-remote damage indicate some of the social and policy questions that have influenced the development of the tort of negligence. 2.1 Structure of the tort Negligence of course means carelessness‚ but in 1934 Lord Wright said: ‘In strict legal analysis‚ negligence means more than heedless or careless conduct‚ whether in omission or commission: it properly connotes the complex concept of duty‚ breach and damage thereby suffered by the person to whom the duty
Premium Negligence Tort Tort law
1953). Bob caused damage to Mary by breaking her legs directly (no remoteness). For this personal physical injury Bob owes Mary’s pecuniary damages. This he must pay if Mary sues Bob in court. When financial loss occurs there must be reasonably foreseeable by a reasonable person. (Overseas Tankship (UK/Ltd) v Morts Dock & Engineering Co Ltd). In which the council found that even though the crew were careless and breached their duty of care‚ the resulting extensive damage by fire was not foreseeable
Premium Contract Tort
NEGLIGENT MISSTATEMENT Main issue: Is the P likely to succeed in an action under the tort of negligence misstatement against the D? Sub-issue 1.1: Duty of Care (NO 3RD PARTY) Law/App: The tort of negligent misstatement was effectively established since the case of (Hedley Byrne v Heller). Law stipulates that there must be a special relationship (an extension of “neighbour principle” established in Donoghue v Stevenson) for between P and D for a DOC to rise in the tort of negligent misstatement:
Premium Negligence Tort Duty of care
announces‚ in advance of the due date for performance‚ that he intends not to perform his side of the bargain. The innocent party may sue for damages immediately the breach is announced. Hochster v De La Tour is an example. Effects of breach A breach of contract‚ no matter what form it may take‚ always entitles the innocent party to maintain an action for damages‚ but the rule established by a long line of authorities is that the right of a party to treat a contract as discharged arises only in three
Premium Contract Contract law Breach of contract
Analyze the problem that Tom Mathis and Danaher Sensors and Controls needed to solve in this case? What were the surrounding issues of the problem? In the case there have few problems that needed Tom Mathis and Danaher Sensors and Control get a solution to make the operation reach more successful and efficiency level. At the time before Tom Mathis joined Danaher Sensors and Controls‚ the enterprise had employed Japanese Kanban method supply chain management instead of replying on a manufacturing
Premium Contract
foreign soveriengs‚ convicts bank rupts. 5. General defences – consent‚ resources cases‚ inevitable accident‚ Act of G mistake private defence‚ necessity statutory authority‚ act of State. 6. Remedies – Judical and extra judicial Damages- kinds of damages remoteness of damages- comparison with principles in contracts ; novas actus intervenes‚ successive action on the same facts‚ Merger of tort in felony. 7. Vicarious liability – Master and Servant – Distinction between servant and independent contractor
Premium Tort
discharged. Briefly discuss likely remedies‚ if any. (B) Discuss remoteness of damages and whether Pedro would be successful in claiming compensation for the lost recording contract. A possible answer: Step1: THE AREA OF LAW: The area of law relevant to these questions are discharge of the contract and where a contract is breached ‚there can be many situations and innocent party is entitled for losses‚ damages‚ remedies‚ delays and get costs compensation directly from the breach
Premium Contract Contract law