Using Tort Principles Will Be Clements V. Clements

1525 Words7 Pages
The case that I will be analyzing using tort principles will be Clements v. Clements, 2012 SCC 32, [2012] 2 S.C.R. 181. This case is deals with negligence, more specifically causation regarding a motor vehicle accident. The passenger is alleging of the driver’s negligence in the operation of motorcycle which caused injury. More specifically, in this case, it was Mr. Clements that did not know about having a nail in this tire, and when it feel out, it caused a deflation. Mr. Clements wasn’t able to control his bike and crashed, causing a traumatic brain injury to his wife Mrs. Clements. In tort law, negligence is one of the principles of Tort. It requires proof of fault and the distinction between negligence and intentional tort is the intent. In the case of Clements v. Clements, the main issue at hand is whether the judge erred in insisting on scientific reconstruction evidence to prove causation and whether the judge should apply the “material contribution” test rather than the “but for” test to determine causation. In legal terms, by its own, the fact that a plaintiff was injured by a defendant whom was negligent does not make the defendant liable. It is the plaintiff’s duty to prove that the defendant’s negligence (which is a breach of the standard of care) caused the injury; this is called Causation, in other words, it is that link that is causation. In this case, Mrs. Clements claimed that her injury was caused by his negligence in the operation of the bike. An

More about Using Tort Principles Will Be Clements V. Clements

Open Document