PROFESSIONAL NEGLIGENCE THE CHANGING COASTLINE OF LIABILITY John L. Powell Q.C. Even the briefest acquaintance with the world’s major financial centres‚ and especially Hong Kong‚ London or New York‚ immediately confirms that we live in world dominated by professionals. The magnificent multi-storey edifices adorning the shores of this and similar cities are the castles and palaces of the present age‚ proclaiming the influence and power of professionals
Premium Tort Negligence Common law
Liability of Negligence When a person is said to be liable for an action under the law‚ it means that they are responsible in some way for the outcome that results either in the law of a nation to be violated which comes under criminal liability‚ or in an injury to other individuals that is considered to be a civil liability. The main requirement for a liability happens to be intent1‚ which says that‚ an individual is not responsible for something that they did not mean to do. However‚ the Law of
Premium Tort Tort law Law
Tort of Negligence Damage and Injury In order for a claim of tortuous liability in negligence to be actionable‚ primarily‚ certain fundamental pre-requisites need to be established in each case respectively. The requirements of the modern tort of negligence were stated by Lord Wright in‚ Lochgelly and Coal Co ltd v McMullan‚ as being‚ i) the existence of a duty of care owed by the defendant to the claimant; ii) a breach of that duty; iii) damage or injury caused by that breach of duty. Each aforesaid
Premium Tort Negligence Injury
Question 1 A Sydney tramway passenger was injured in a collision with another tram‚ which occurred after the driver collapsed at the controls. The plaintiff argued that the collision could have been avoided if the tramway authority had fitted the tram with a system known as `dead man’s handle’‚ a system in use on Sydney’s trains. According to my findings‚ Dead Man’s Handle refers to an old train device: the dead man’s handle. It was typically some form of switch that the driver would keep
Premium Tort Tort law Duty of care
1 Task – 1 1.1 Importance of Essential Elements of Contract Contract represents the instrument to enforce promises. Not all statements amount to enforceable promises or contracts. To enforce statements there are a number of elements which courts look for and these mainly include the presence of offer‚ its communication‚ its unconditional acceptance and communication of the acceptance. Once this has taken place then the element of consideration gives the badge of enforceability to the contract and
Premium Contract
Week 2 Negligence Negligence Negligence is defined as persons or business’s actions that make them liable to foreseeable consequences of their actions. There are certain steps that the plaintiff needs to prove negligence on the defendant’s behalf. These elements are duty of care‚ breach of this duty of care‚ plaintiff suffered injury‚ defendant caused the injury‚ and it was the proximate cause for the plaintiffs’ injury (Cheeseman‚ 2013). In the case of the Bryntesen family we need to prove
Premium Tort Law Tort law
Reading Michalos‚ ‘Douglas v Hello: the final frontier’‚ [2007] Ent. L.R. 241-246 Aplin‚ ‘The development of the action for breach of confidence in a post-HRA era’ [2007] IPQ 19-59 Aplin‚ ‘The relationship between breach of confidence and the "tort of misuse of private information’ [2007] Kings Law Journal 329-336 Aplin‚ ‘Commercial confidences after the Human Rights Act’ [2007] EIPR 411-419 Arnold‚ ‘Confidence in exclusives: Douglas v Hello! in the House of Lords’ [2007] EIPR 339 Arnold‚
Premium
HOGESCHOOL UTRECHT Law Chapter 4 Tort Tort Contents 1) 2) Introduction .......................................................................................................................................... 2 1.1) Tort and Crime .............................................................................................................................. 2 1.2) Tort and Contract ............................................................................................................
Premium Tort Tort law
Defenses to Negligence Eleven-year-old Neal Peterson collided into forty-three-year-old David Donahue on a Minnesota ski slope in February of 2000. Peterson was headed down the slope at a fast speed when he struck Donahue who was travelling at a slow speed across the slope toward the parking lot. In seeking compensation for his injuries‚ Peterson filed suit against Donahue alleging negligence. As both skiers claim to be experienced‚ understand the associated risks and collisions involved
Free Common law Law Tort law
personal property. 6. If a person breaches a duty of care and another person suffers an injury‚ the breach must have caused the harm for liability to result. 7. In many states‚ the plaintiff’s negligence is a defense that may be raised in a negligence suit. 8. Negligence per se may occur on the violation of a statute. 9. Kelly is injured when she slips and falls on Lee’s sidewalk. To determine whether Lee owed a duty of care to Kelly‚ Lee is subject to the standard of
Premium Contract