The incident involved Leslea an employee of the hotel and Mr Toxopersonas a guest. Mr Toxopersonas had informed the hotel that he was a diabetic and needed special meal requests. Leslea‚ at the time of employment accidently mixed up meal orders resulting in Mr Toxopersonas receiving coco pops; Mr Toxopersonas consumed the coco pops of which he passed out and several losses occurred from the incident. The Law of Negligence appears relevant in this situation. In (Gerbic and Miller 2010 P.430) the three
Premium Tort law Tort
distance | 1. Different language 2. Different social norms 3. Different ethnicities | 1. Absence of colonial ties 2. Absence of shared monetary or political association 3. Government policies 4. Institutional weakness | 1. Physical remoteness 2. Weak transportation or communication links
Premium Management Business Marketing
PART A Sita is able to claim personal injury damages under an action in tort for negligence. The principle of these damages is restituo in inegrum‚ which is based on the principle restoring the plaintiff to the position they were in before the tort took place (Sharman)1. These damages are presented on a once and for all basis as a lump sum with the date of assessment being that of the date of trial. 1. Economic Loss Economic loss is under Divison 2 of the Civil Liability Act2 (CLA). Under
Premium Contract Tort Damages
Duty of Care 6 3.20 Breach of Duty of Care 7 3.30 Causation 7 3.40 Remoteness of Damages 7 4.00 Statutory changes to Common Law Negligence (in NSW) 8 5.00 Development of negligence in Australia following 8 Bryan v Maloney 6.00 How the decision of Woolcock
Premium Negligence Tort Tort law
ii. There is detention and the restraint must complete. Defences in Trespass to Person 1. Self-defence and defence of property‚ injury or damage suffered by the plaintiff is caused by the defendant. 2. The defence’s necessity – to save 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
Premium Tort Duty of care
nowadays technology‚ being able to log onto social media wherever there is an internet connection available. Just as Simmel’s stranger‚ the social media user’s ’appearance of mobility within a bounded group occasions that synthesis of nearness and remoteness which constitutes the formal position of the
Premium Sociology Social media Communication
! ! ! Liability for Negligence! 1. The Duty! PURE ECONOMIC LOSS ! Neighbour Test (Donoghue v Stevenson): Care must be taken to avoid acts Salient Features Test (Perre v Apand): Neighbour test is not enough in cases of which you can reasonably foresee would be likely to injure your neighbour. Who are pure economic loss to establish a duty of care‚ which caused a need for further persons I ought to reasonably have in contemplation as I take an action/omission. tests to identify
Premium Tort Tort law Negligence
Concurrent liability Text [13.45] – [13.65]‚ [13.80] – [13.120] Vicarious liability is the liability of an employer for a tort committed by an employee within the course of employment Stevens v Brodribb sawmilling the existence of control between an employer and employee is not enough to prove a relationship for vicarious liability. Further criteria such as obligation to work‚ hours to work etc is also considered Elazac pty ltd v Sheriff the plaintiff was not an employee but a contractor
Premium Tort law Tort
Duty of care Issue: Does defendant (David or the Bright Smiles Dental Surgery) owned duty of care to plaintiff (Tony)? Rules: * The neighbour principle: In Donoghue v Stevenson1‚ Lord Atkin concluded that we all owe a duty of care to our “neighbors”‚ meaning those persons who we should have in mind when we are contemplating actions that we take as we go about our business and private lives. * Neighbour Defined: “My neighbors are persons who are so closely and directly affected by
Premium Tort law Tort Law
A type of contract‚ a legally binding agreement between two parties to do a certain thing‚ in which one side has all the bargaining power and uses it to write the contract primarily to his or her advantage[1]. Breach of Contract Common Breaches of Contract When any contract is made an agreement is formed between parties to carry out a service and payment for that service. If one of the parties fails to carry out their side of the agreement then the party can be said to be in breach of contract
Premium Contract Breach of contract Contract law