Negligent Tort - Assignment Example

Tort is any legal or civil injury or harm that is caused or directed to a person, company or a party. We would therefore categorize this action under negligent tort. The following elements constitutes negligent tort. A person or a company must owe the customer or individual in question a product or service. The company or the person must violate a promise and obligation. In this case, Philips Company would be violating the consumer safety Act. The consumer must have suffered injury or loss in the process of using the product or the service.

The injury or loss must be seen because of the negligence of the manufacture of the product or the service. The government to produce products, which are safe and durable, has licensed Philips Company. The government has licensed the company and therefore mandated the company with the duty of care. Duty of care is the relationship and circumstance under which the law recognizes as providing rise to any legal duty to take care of consumers. If Philips Company fails to take care of its consumers then it may lead to legal battle whether the defendant would be liable to pay damages for the loss or damages.

The person that is injured is suffering the loss due to the breach of duty of care by the company. According to the US law, standard of care is the level of conduct expected from Philips Company in this regard to avoid liabilities for negligence. If the company or the person fails to meet the expected standards then there is a breach of duty. Philips Company has the mandate of producing standardized products. The reason for the hazards indicate that the products are substandard and do not meet the requirements of the law.

This is a breach of duty since the company should provide better services with optimum quality to avoid cases injuries to the consumers. If any person had suffered any injury or harm while using the lamps, the person would be protected from the negligence of the consumer through the negligence liability. The law requires that consumers conform to the standard of care by providing information regarding any under standardized products. Breach of duty occurs when the defendant, which in this case is Philips Company, fails to meet the standards that is set or required by the law.

The state expects that companies licensed to provide services to the consumers meet the expected standard. The consumers Act protect from malice and under standardization the consumers. The consumer Act protects all consumers from exploitation. Once it is established that Philips Company owes a consumer the duty of care, it is necessary for the consumers to demonstrate to the court that the company’s action was in breach of duty. Actual causation is the factor that leads to the occurrence of the event.

If the factor were missing then the event would not occur. In other words, actual causation is also termed as factual cause. As the consumer, it is important to prove to the courts that if Philips Company would have made the wires in such a way that they will not arc, burn and cause fire leading to shattering and laceration, the injury or loss would not occur. The complainant must present his/her defense in the following manner, “but for the existence of A, would B have occurred”. Proximate causation or legal cause existence is when the complainant proves that the defendant’s negligence is a substantial factor that has led to the injury or loss