Exploring Obligations in a Legal Sense
Negligence in tort has various meanings. It may refer to the tort of negligence or it may refer to careless behaviour. A person who totally disregards the safety of others but does not injure them is not guilty of negligence, although they may be morally reprehensible. On the other hand, the person who tries their best but fall below the standard set by the court and causes any damage will be liable.[1] Negligence is judged by an objective standard set, where the court will look at what a ‘responsible man or woman’ would have done in the defendant’s position. An example of this is in the case of Nettleship v Weston (1971)[2] , the defendant was a learner
…show more content…
The defendant’s were held liable in negligence because it was held that a duty of care was owed to him even though the illness he suffered was extremely rare.
Duty is about relationships, and it must be shown that the particular defendant stood in the required relationship to the claimant such that he came under an obligation to use care towards him. This relationship is sometimes referred to as ‘proximity’. In cases of personal injury, the necessary relationship is established if the defendant ought to have foreseen damage to the claimant. Duty means ‘proximity’ in the legal sense, and proximity means the level of closeness of relationship required for the particular kind of damage. Foresight of damage is required in all cases of negligence and there is a policy element, which is expressed by the view that it must be just and reasonable to impose a duty in that class of case.
Prakash does owe a duty of care to Shamilla. He was in breach of his duty towards Shamilla because he was riding his bike despite two days prior he injured his arm whilst riding his bike. Due to his arm injury, he was not able to steer his bicycle correctly and, therefore, he collided with Shamilla. Prakash was expected of what a prudent man or reasonable man would
1) Since the injured plaintiff was not wearing a seatbelt, why is Ford being sued for failing to test the seatbelt sleeve?
As Privy Council held in the case of "Wagon Mound (No 1)" that a party can only be held liable for damage that was reasonably foreseeable, the defendant should not be responsible for losses that are ‘too remote’ from the breach. It is obviously that the university could foresee that Brad have to quit his job to finish the degree and also need to pay for the fees.
In this paper I am going to identify some the legal and ethical issues in My Sister’s Keeper. Some of those issues include emancipation of a minor, genetic engineering, and limited termination of parental rights. I will be giving my opinion on these matters also.
The (Plaintiff) Johnny Singstealer is seeking the sum of $1 million from the (Defendant) Bobby Bandleader, for alleged copyright abuse of the song “Happy Birthday to You”. The (Plaintiff) Johnny Singstealer is the copyright holder to the said song. The (Defendant) Bobby Bandleader is a Bistro owner who performs the song in an altered version (his own words are used) to his customers on their birthdays and have been doing so for the past twenty years without obtaining any licensing or permission from the copyright holder (Plaintiff) Johnny Singstealer.
1. Give an example of a case that would fall under diversity jurisdiction. Explain all of the key elements of such a case.
In the case of Robinson v. California, 370 U.S. 660 (1962), the Supreme Court ruled that a law may not punish a status; i.e., one may not be punished to being an alcoholic or for being addicted to drugs. However, of course, one may be punished for actions such as abusing drugs. The question becomes; What if the status “forces” the action? What if a person, because of his/her addiction to drugs, is “forced” by the addiction to purchase and abuse the illegal drugs? Would punishing that person be unfairly punishing a status?
In the case in the text where someone purchased a used safe at an auction for $50, but
case brief---Gregory, a comedy writer, entered into a contract with Wessel, a comedian. The contract provided that Gregory would provide Wessel with a 15 minute monologue for his upcoming appearance on the comedy hour and Wessel will pay $250 to Gregory. All performers could make $500 per appearance on the comedy hour. and when Wessel was scheduled to aper on the comedy hour, Gregory informed him that he was unable to provide the monologue, because last time Wessel was asked to make special guest appearances at three local comedy clubs performance during the comedy hour. and Wessel bought lawsuit to Gregory for beach of contract and request damages of $1250.
"If a law is unjust, a man is not only right to disobey it, he is obligated to do so" (Thomas Jefferson).The main guideline or law for America is that everyone is free to have their own opinions about anything that seems of importance. However, when having an opinion leads toward an issue more opposing to the laws of America, then there is a problem. The issue of going against laws instituted by the American government has not been to big of a problem through the past years. Unfortunately with the new president in office, even before that, people have decided to take matters into their own hands. While standing up for what you believe in or having a non-violent protest against a considered “unjust law or action” is completely acceptable, becoming a criminal does nothing to help the situation. Standing up for what a person puts their trust in is something that has kept America a great country thus far, but since people have turned to violence consequences need to be put into place.
1. The issue is whether public school officials have the authority to perform strip searches of students in suspicion of hiding illegal drugs.
Human society is often seen as a gateway to corruption. No matter how pure an individual is, or thinks he is, he is constantly subject to falling from morality. This concept is explored in many legends, religions, and literature ever since mankind has begun telling stories. Whether it be the Garden of Eden or the Godfather, humanity has been fascinated with the struggle, and many times failure, of virtue against vice. No different is the tale of Mr. Ashok in Aravind Adiga’s
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 established by law for the protection of others against unreasonable risk of harm(Stuhmcke and Corporation.E 2001). The standard measure of negligence is the universal reasonable person standard. The assumption in this case is that a reasonable
Throughout the United States there are many different laws among the fifty states that make up this union. The laws are different throughout the states because of the need of the laws. Living in one state and not having the advantages or disadvantages of a law in another state would not be that unfair or unequal. This is true because if you don’t like a law in your state you could always fight it and try to change it or you could always move out of that state and go to one that has the laws that you like.
When it comes to large sums of money, it is not uncommon for the spender to feel they have been ripped off or become over protected. The practice of law is no exception to this phenomenon, and crocked lawyers and paralegals have negatively contributed to the notion. On several occasions law professionals have taken client money for personal use, acting against the law and rules of professional conduct. Although lawyers and paralegals have their own individual rules and guidelines to abide by, they follow the same professional structure of proper conduct. The rules of conduct for paralegals is governed by the Law Society of Upper Canada and is the governing body responsible for reports of misconduct. Further investigations will lay out the proper procedures and tasks that must be completed when a paralegal encounters an accusations of misconduct, specifically when a client accuses a paralegal of misappropriating money from the clients trust fund. When it comes to possible options it is important to remember that by proactively sending a report of the circumstance to the Law Society of Upper Canada with a detailed list of events, bookkeeping and accounts billed to the client will help your case prior to the client reporting you to the Law Society. Should a paralegal choose to ignore the threat of the client, in hopes that the client will not follow through with higher involvement, the paralegal will then face an audit by the Law Society. If the Law Society is apprised that the
There was definitely the misuse of virtue ethics because the Dow Chemicals didn’t show respect for the individuals of Bhopal that is proved by the about of dollar they put per victim.