Criminal Law and the Australian Legal System - Essay Example

? Business Law - Common Law Question Introduction Law is a tool to regulate the social as well as economic behavior of the society. It is a collection of rules as well as regulations for governing the society by social institution. Laws are formulated by the government or the legislative body of the country. It is formulated to provide peace as well as order to the society. Law is based on two principles which are order in the system as well as coercion which signifies that without enforcement there is no law. Violation or breach of law may lead to taking legal actions as well as steps against the wrongdoer. Law is separated into two parts which are criminal law as well as civil law (Barker, 2000). Criminal law is enacted when some harm is committed to the social order and the convict person is penalized with fines or imprisonment. Criminal law is developed from the common law as well as the statutes enacted by the government like the Crimes Act 1900 New South Wales (NSW). Most of the criminal statutes of Australia are derived from the English criminal law. Criminal law is divided into two segments which are ‘indictable offences’ as well as ‘summary offences’. ‘Indictable offences’ are the cases which are recorded in the document ‘indictment’ prepared for the ‘Crown’ (State) as prosecutor. ‘Summary offences’ are the cases which are required to be settled in front of the magistrate (Criminal law and civil law, 2012). Civil law deals with disagreements in among individuals or organizations as well as provides legal remedy. Civil law involves cases relating to accidents as well as contracts. The civil law cases are to be settled in a court before a judge providing reasons for the actions taken in settlement of the claims (Criminal law and civil law, 2012). IRAC denotes Issue, Rule, Application as well as Conclusion. The method or framework is a valuable process to formulate legal analysis. The aspect of issue depicts the significant controversy upon which the basic foundation of the case is formulated. The section of rule or relevant law describes the prevalent laws that can be applied to the identified issue in terms of legal case scenario. The analysis section comprises the use of the relevant rule to the recognized issue. The conclusion section includes the expected outcomes of the identified issue/case. In relation to the provided scenario, the IRAC method would be applied in order to gauge the possible outcomes of the case (What is IRAC?, n.d.). According to the scenario of the case, Anna was injured for apparent negligence of Michael who was driving the car under the influence of alcohol. Thus, Anna wanted to take legal actions against Michael. Issue The identified issue that would be presented to the court for trials would be a scenario which occurred in a rainy late night where Anna desired to have a lift to home from Michael rather than waiting for other taxis for commutation to home. During her travel with Michael, Anna came to know that he had consumed alcohol and he faced problems in keeping control of the vehicle. However, Anna still agreed to continue her journey with Michael on way to Anna’s home. After travelling to a certain distance, Michael lost control over the car and hit a tree. This accident resulted in causing severe injuries to Anna and Michael. Subsequent to the accident, Anna decided to sue Michael for the accident causing her injuries and moreover for the probable negligence which took place on that on behalf of Michael. Moreover, this case intends to emphasize on the circumstances that whether Anna will be able to sue Michael for his negligence or not in relation to the circumstance in which the accident took place. In this case, in order to succeed in the trails after suing Michael the aspects that Anna should consider and establish have also been analyzed. Rules/Relevant Law In relation to the issue of the case, Anna was provided lift by Michael who had consumed more than allowable level of alcohol which resulted in an accident causing injuries to both of them. In this context, it can be said that Anna has the power to sue Michael for the negligence under the laws prevalent in Australia. The Australian legal system consists of law as well as justice to ensure that the people whether Australians or non-Australians are treated equally and their safety ensured. The Australian Constitution was established in 1901 as a federal system and the power of exercising these laws were alienated in between the federal government as well as the states. In Australia, there are nine legal based systems out of which there are eight state as well as territory systems along with one federal system. The Australian’s legal system has three branches of the government which are legislative as well as executive along with judicial. The Australian High Court applies as well as practices the law of Australia in settlement of disputes. The High Court consists of Chief Justice as well as six judges who can execute decisions together or separately. The other types of courts under the Constitution of Australia are the Family Court of Australia as well as the Federal Court of Australia along with Federal Magistrate Court of Australia (Australian Government, 2012). The Family Court of Australia is the court which deals with the family law. It consists of high quality judges as well as staff who are entitled to solve the disputes of the family. It also includes repositioning of children worldwide by parents and this law was enforced in Australia from 1998. The Federal Court takes into consideration a wider extent of legal cases which include all civil matters as well as a few criminal matters. The Federal Magistrate Court was set up in 1999 and it settles almost all issues which are related to the federal laws of Australia (Australian Government, 2012). Under the legal system of Australia, car accidents may result in claims for personal injuries. Car accidents follow the law of negligence or the Tort Law which state that the person who is injured should be compensated with the losses for the fault of another person. Negligence is the act of doing something which a sensible person would never commit and it also states that the person has not acted in conformity with responsibility. The person who is injured (plaintiff) needs to prove the fault or negligence which resulted in the accident as well as injury against the other individual (defendant) to be compensated with the losses. Plaintiff is the person who takes legal actions for the injuries done. The plaintiff needs to show the evidences for the wrong done against the person who committed it. Defendant is the individual against whom the legal charges have been filed as well as needs to bear the consequences along with pay the compensations if committed such crime. The law of Negligence is based on three principles which include to provide compensation to the one who suffered without committing any mistakes as well as to discourage the acts which have resulted from the negligent as well as harmful conduct of a person along with to allocate responsibility to the wrongdoers for the negligent act (Bugg, 2006). According to Australian drunk driving law, a driver while driving a vehicle influenced under alcohol consumption can be sued in respect of both criminal and civil jurisdictions. Moreover, these kinds of offences are considered or observed by the Australian Road Rules 1999 which comes or formulated under Road Traffic Act 1961. This Act considers two offences related to drinking and driving which includes driving under the influence and crossing the prescribed concentration of alcohol. The consumption of alcohol is measured through an instrument namely Alcohol Interlock Device. Under the Australian Road Traffic Act 1961, it is depicted that there is certain allowable percentages of alcohol consumption level for the permanent and learner driving license holders. Furthermore, the consumption percentages are for license holder 0.05%, boat operator and crew 0.05%, drivers of buses, taxis, heavy vehicle and vehicles moving hazardous goods 0.0% along with learner and no license holder 0.05%. According to the specified percentages by the Act, if the drivers were found consuming in excess of the alcohol consumption percentages then they might face penalties such as fine, imprisonment or cancellation of license. Additionally, if a drunken driver injures any person while driving, it is stated as a criminal offence under this Act (Alcohol Laws, 2012). Tort law also plays a significant role to obtain positive verdict for the plaintiff who claims compensations for injuries made by another person’s negligent act. With reference to the context of tort law, it can be defined as the situations under which a person claims for damages from another person by whose actions the plaintiff has been injured. The injuries that tort law undertakes are mental or physical injury, property injury and financial aspects among others (Schafer, 1999). There are three types of tort law which include intentional or direct torts, unintentional or indirect torts and miscellaneous torts. Furthermore, intentional or direct torts can be defined as the intentional doings of a person through which another person was affected or injured (Hensel, 2009). Unintentional tort can be defined as the accidental performances of a person through which another person is being affected or harmed. In other words, unintentional or indirect tort is also known as tort law of negligence (Meiners, Ringleb, & Edwards, 2008). Miscellaneous tort can be defined as the doings of a person which is neither intentional nor unintentional. Additionally, miscellaneous tort can be termed as nuisance (Gibson & Fraser, 2012). In relation to the provided case scenario, another similar case incidence can be observed to identify the possible outcomes that Anna can expect through the case. The case “Gross Negligence from Drunk Driving Causes Head-On Collision, Leading to a Settlement of $2,266,141” reveals that on August 10, 2010, a lady who is the plaintiff was driving a car along with a passenger when it was hit by another car from the front. As a result, the plaintiff and the passenger endured serious injuries. The plaintiff had to endure leg and hand fractures along with fingers and right wrist as well as torn ligaments and fractured ribs. With these injuries, the plaintiff was not able to perform any task independently because she had to use a walking cane and was not able to raise her right arm properly. This accident happened primarily because the defendant had consumed excess level of alcohol for which the defendant lost control and entered the long lane and hit the plaintiff’s car from front. With reference to the context, it is observed that plaintiff sued the defendant for the accident. Moreover, the plaintiff received a substantial amount of compensation for the injuries caused to her due to an act of negligence. Thus, the similar kind of incidence is applicable in case of the provided scenario with Anna as she had also suffered injuries due to similar kind of act of negligence and her chances of attaining success also seems to be quite evident (Gross Negligence from Drunk Driving Causes Head-On Collision, Leading to a Settlement of $2,266,141., 2012). Analysis/Application to Facts From the case about the accident faced by Anna and Michael, it can be observed that to a certain extent Michael is found to be convict. However, there was a factor which needs to be considered in this aspect which is that Anna despite knowing the fact that Michael was under the influence of alcohol, still she wanted to continue the journey to her home with Michael. According to Australian legal system, Anna has certain legal rights to sue Michael. According to the identified relevant laws, it can be stated that Michael had done a good job by giving lift to Anna in at late night when it was raining quite heavily. However, in spite of doing a good job, Michael broke certain rules further which have been identified as the condition where Michael was driving the car after consuming excess level of alcohol, as can be observed from the scenario that he was finding it difficult to keep the vehicle on the road properly. Relating to the condition, Anna can sue Michael for drinking and driving. Furthermore, it is also observed that Anna herself asked for a lift from Michael instead of waiting for taxi. With reference to the context, it can be stated that Anna cannot sue Michael for the accident in terms of the aspect of intentional performance of any harm or injury because intentionally Michael had not motivated or influenced Anna for the lift; it was Anna who desired to take lift from Michael (Criminal law and civil law, 2012). From the Australian legal point of view, drinking and driving is a criminal offence which is specified by the Australian Legislative Council. According to Australian law, Anna has right to sue and claim the compensations for the injuries caused in the accident. This is because it was Michael’s responsibility to drop Anna safely to her home when he agreed to give her lift. The other most important fact is that Michael had violated the legal rules presented in the Australian legal structure (Shircore, 2007). According to Australian legal system, Anna has to launch a complaint related to drink and drive condition against Michael for the accident occurrence in the police station. Furthermore, the case will be sent or put in the Australian Court for trails for resolving the problem. From the view point of Australian legal system, Anna’s complaint report will be filed under the criminal offence case and the case will be carried forward under the Criminal Jurisdiction. Moreover, Anna plays the roles of plaintiff because she has decided to start a civil action against Michael. Additionally, Michael acts as a defendant because the complaint is launched against him and he needs to defend to save himself from being accused as a convict in relation to Australian law. This case will be launched by considering the prevalent legal Act and its formulated date which has been prepared by Australian Legislation Body. With reference to the context, it is assumed that under the Court’s judgment Michael will be punished with imprisonment if he is found guilty. Contextually, Anna can sue Michael for the accident as well as for driving car after consuming excessive level of alcohol (Australian Government, 2012). Under the Australian Road Traffic Act 1961, Michael can be found to be a guilty person, for which Anna may be able to sue him for the accident as well as negligence. This is because Michael had crossed the prescribed percentage level of alcohol consumption laid by the Australian Road Rules 1999 for which he met with the accident causing injury to Anna. Moreover, from the Australian Road Traffic Act 1961’s viewpoint Michael made criminal offences by consuming excess level of alcohol along with meeting with an accident and injuring Anna seriously while driving in such a condition. These aspects need to be established by Anna to successfully achieve the desired verdict (Alcohol Laws, 2012). Contextually, it is observed that along with criminal and civil laws there is another law which is known as tort law. Generally, tort law considers the aspects related to property and physical or mental injury of a person. Under this law, plaintiff receives compensation from defendant for causing harm to plaintiff. With reference to the context, it can be stated that Anna can also sue Michael for the compensations of medical expenses invested in medical treatment. This is because Michael was heavily drunk and under that condition he gave lift to Anna when she asked and while moving towards home Michael lost control of the car and hit a tree for which both Anna along with Michael were injured (Schafer, 1999). There are three groups of tort law among which unintentional or indirect tort laws has been considered. Furthermore, this law also known as tort law of negligence. This law can only be considered by the plaintiff, if he/she is being affected by the performances of defendant. With reference to the presented scenario, it is assumed that tort law of negligence can be considered by Anna in suing Michael for compensation. It is in this context that Michael had taken the responsibility to drop Anna home safely. However, it is observed that during that particular situation Michael was not in a stable condition in comparison to reasonable person and failed to care Anna on the way to home because he met with an accident and both of them were seriously injured. Generally, a reasonable person does not fail to care for the guest or harm the guest. In suing the defendant, plaintiff should consider certain factors such as whether the defendant provided plaintiff with duty of care, defendant violated the duty and plaintiff suffered injury for violating the norms (Meiners, Ringleb, & Edwards, 2008). With reference to Anna, it is observed that all the three factors are present in relation to Michael’s performance. As a result, Michael can be termed as the convict and Anna can took the legal measures to sue. It can also be mentioned in relation to the terms and conditions of tort law of negligence that there is a fixed time period within which plaintiff has to claim or sue defendant for the compensations. Contextually, it can be stated that if Anna wants to claim for the compensation she needs to maintain the time frame within which she should sue for the compensations. According to the referred accident case of ‘Gross Negligence from Drunk Driving Causes Head-On Collision, Leading to a Settlement of $2,266,141’, it is recognized that the defendant had consumed in excess of twice the legal percentage level of alcohol prescribed by the country law. As a result, the defendant was charged with penalties which included the payment of all medical treatments of plaintiff in present and future along with 18 years of imprisonment. With reference to the case and the relevant penalties, Anna could also sue Michael for consuming excess of alcohol along with injuring her in the accident and also can claim compensation. There is also significant chance for Anna to win the case which was filed against Michael (Gross Negligence from Drunk Driving Causes Head-On Collision, Leading to a Settlement of $2,266,141., 2012). Conclusion From the analysis of the scenario it is established that Anna herself took lift from Michael late at night when it was raining heavily. After taking lift, Anna found that Michael had consumed excess amount of alcohol. On the way to home, Michael lost control over the car and hit a tree along with injuring Anna and himself as well. After the accident, Anna thought to sue Michael for negligence which caused the accident. According to Australian law, it can be established that a person who consumed excess level of alcohol during driving vehicle is committing a criminal offence and for which he/she may be punished with imprisonment or fines. Moreover, under Civil Jurisdiction, a drunken driver can also be punished with compensation for the casualties if the driver causes accident and injures any person. Contextually, it is also observed that under civil jurisdiction, tort law is being considered and the victim can claim for casualty compensation in keeping with the tort law within a particular time period. In relation to the accident caused by Michael within the periphery of Australian legal system, Anna can also sue Michael for the accident under Criminal Jurisdiction. This is because under Australian Road Traffic Act 1961, drunken driving is considered as a criminal offence. Contextually, by consuming excess level of alcohol while driving Michael lost control over the car and met with an accident as well as violated Australian legal laws. Furthermore, Michael had failed to drop Anna home safely because he met with accident and injured Anna and himself, thus violating tort law for not fulfilling the duty of care to the guest. Additionally, with reference to the case report, it is also assumed that Anna can sue Michael for his negligence and there is also chance to win the case. References Alcohol Laws. (2012). Retrieved August 28, 2012, from http://www.dassa.sa.gov.au/site/page.cfm?u=124 Australian Government. (2012). Retrieved August 28, 2012, from http://www.dfat.gov.au/facts/legal_system.html Barker, D. (2000). Essential Australian Law. United Kingdom: Routledge Bugg, T. (2006). Negligence and damages. Law Council of Australia, 2-10. Criminal law and civil law. (2012). Retrieved August 28, 2012, from http://www.skwirk.com.au/p-c_s-18_u-99_t-243_c-813/criminal-law-and-civil-law/nsw/criminal-law-and-civil-law/law-and-society/areas-of-law Gibson, A. & Fraser, D. (2012). Business Law. Forest Hill, NSW: Pearson Education Gross Negligence from Drunk Driving Causes Head-On Collision, Leading to a Settlement of $2,266,141. (2012). Retrieved August 28, 2012, from http://attorneylending.com/blog/tag/motor-vehicle/ Hensel. (2009). The Intentional Torts: Battery & Assault. Retrieved August 28, 2012, from http://law.gsu.edu/whensel/TORTS1-2eve.pdf Meiners, R. E., Ringleb, AI. H. & Edwards, F. L. (2008). The Legal Environment of Business. USA: Cengage Learning. Schafer, H. B. (1999). Tort law: General. University of Hamburg - Institute of Law and Economics, pp. 569-596. Retrieved August 28, 2012, from Edward Elgar Publishing Limited. Shircore, M. (2007). Drinking, driving and causing injury: The position of the passenger of an intoxicated driver. Queensland University of Technology Law and Justice Journal, Vol. 7, No. 2, pp. 375-402. Retrieved August 28, 2012, from Queensland University of Technology. What is IRAC?, (n.d.). Retrieved August 28, 2012, from http://www.tsu.edu/pdffiles/academics/law/life/support/IRAC.pdf Bibliography Driving laws, offences and penalties. (2011). Retrieved August 28, 2012, from http://www.sa.gov.au/subject/Transport,+travel+and+motoring/Motoring/Drivers+and+licences/Driving+offences+and+penalties/Driving+laws,+offences+and+penalties Read More