Exclusion Clauses Essays

The Civil Liabilities Act 2002 defines negligence as a failure on the part of the defendant which results in the harm of the plaintiff which could have been prevented by taking reasonable care. The breach of duty must be foreseeable, Sullivan v Moody. The risk must be not insignificant, and a reasonable person under similar circumstances would have taken precaution against the harm. In this case

There are two defences to an action in negligence: contributory negligence and voluntary assumption of risk. (FoBL, 2005, p83) This case only involves contributory negligence.

Dixon did not meet the standard of care. Meaning he is a part of the blame. The clause did not excuse the defendant's

The area of law to be discussed would be implied 'terms of a contract which are not agreed by the parties.' They are terms which are related to 'contingencies which might affect the contract of employment in this case.' This is what 'parties intended but left unwritten in the gap of a contract.' There are five conditions by which a contract would be satisfied before a term would be implied. They are 'reasonable and equitable, necessary to give business efficacy so no term will be implied if

In Caparo Industries plc v Dickman7, it was determined that courts had to test the duty by “whether the damage was reasonably foreseeable, whether there was a relationship of proximity between claimant and defendant, and whether it is just and reasonable to impose a duty.”8 If so, then a duty of care could arise.

The Exclusionary Rule has been around since the early 1900s, and it is a rule that some defendants who are involved in a felonious case tend to use as a remedy for unlawful searches that has a habit of violating their Fourth Amendment rights. This rule also dictates that any evidence that was unlawfully obtained should be ruled out as evidence under our Fourth Amendment, and the Mapp v. Ohio, 367 U.S. 643 is one of these cases that discusses this rule and evidences being excluded. Now, before this rule was created, “any evidence was admissible in a criminal trial if the judge found the evidence to be relevant, and how the evidence was seized was not considered an important issue” (“Exclusionary Rule”, n.d., para. 4).

Joe, great job in describing the Mapp v. Ohio case where the exclusionary rule came into play. If you have been in law enforcement long enough and have made cases, particularly involving drugs and DUI’s, the chances that one of your cases involving the exclusionary rule are likely. I absolutely believe in the exclusionary rule because it protects a person from illegal searches and seizures. All of the cases that the defense tried to use the exclusionary rule against me was just an attempt to get their client’s charges dismissed because that was their only chance to have their client exonerated. I have witnessed several interdiction stops that led to large money and drug seizures be dismissed because the judge ruled that the stop was illegal.

The Constitution is the most important document in America's history. However, it does create much controversy because of its context. The Fourth Amendment is just one of the many parts of the document causing contention within the country. The Fourth Amendment states,

The United States Constitution has a search and seizure requirement provided for in the Fourth Amendment. The constitution seeks to protect the privacy of its citizens from arbitrary and unfounded searches in their private property. The amendment broadens the scope of searches and seizure, where it prevents the government from exploiting the privacy of citizens when they are at their homes, places of work, and even public places. It prevents law enforcement groups from randomly stopping citizens on the streets and searching them without probable cause to do the same (Re, 2014). The exclusionary rule ensures that law enforcers abide by the provision of the fourth amendment. It prevents evidence that is attained from unreasonable searches and seizures from being used against suspects in a court of law. A case that illustrates the same

In chapter ten, the authors discuss the instance where the exclusionary rule may be ineffective. The exclusionary rule was created to deter illegal police misconduct; however, the exclusionary rule does not apply to private searches made out by private investigators. The violation of the fourth amendment applies to police or other officials in the executive branch of government. The violation of a defendant’s standing may in fact suppress evidence. Thus, Evidence gathered by private investigators is not subjected to the exclusionary rule. In addition, the exclusionary rule is only applicable in criminal cases to suppress evidence. In civil lawsuits, the evidence suppressed can be used against the defendant. In the O.J. Simpson case, a lawsuit

The genesis of the Exclusionary Rule can be traced in early 1900s. It was established to ensure that law enforcement officers followed the law in collecting incriminating evidence. The Exclusionary Rule was designed by the Supreme Court making it a court-made rule. The rule is not like other normal rules that are created by statutes passed by the legislative bodies. The essay will outline how the Exclusionary Rule was developed highlighting the various cases that proved pivotal in its implementation.

To best understand the effects of the Exclusion Act, looking at the background before 1923 is necessary. In the mid-1800s China’s spike in population was unaccounted for leading to insufficient land to sustain such a large population, around 430 million at the time. Land shortages were abundant especially in the south of China in places like Guangdong which prompted many to seek a living outside of China’s boarders. Drought and flooding were also common, so landowners tended to rent out what land they had to farmers instead of employing peasants. In the 1860s the Fraser River gold rush and the construction of the Canadian Pacific Railway led many to immigrate to the British Colombia area. The government even encouraged Chinese immigrants for a source of cheap labour especially for dangerous jobs in the mines. The

The exclusionary rule exists so that the government cannot use evidence if it is seized in violation of the Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution (Carlson, 2017). That is to say that there are certain requirements that are needed in different situations to search an individual.

As well provides that the maker of such a statement shall not be liable in an action based on an

Law 2: Under statute law, unfair terms within a contract are deemed by the court as unenforceable. As a result, the court will remove these terms from the standard form contract, and treat the contract as if the term was never present (Australian Consumer Law s 23(1)). One such example of unfair terms is when a term that allows one party (but not the other) to vary the terms of the contract after it has been agreed to (ACL s 25(1)(d)). In order to void the term under the Act (ACL s 23 (1)), two main requirements must be satisfied: