StudentShare
Contact Us
Sign In / Sign Up for FREE
Search
Go to advanced search...
Free

Tort of negligence - Assignment Example

Comments (1) Cite this document
Summary
Question Presented 1. What is the role of the chain of causation in the tort of negligence? A tort is a civil, as opposed to criminal, wrong that is recognized by law as grounds for a lawsuit and is redressed by an award of damages. Smith v. United States, 507 U.S…
Download full paper File format: .doc, available for editing
GRAB THE BEST PAPER97% of users find it useful
Tort of negligence
Read Text Preview

Extract of sample "Tort of negligence"

Question Presented What is the role of the chain of causation in the tort of negligence? A tort is a civil, as opposed to criminal, wrong that isrecognized by law as grounds for a lawsuit and is redressed by an award of damages. Smith v. United States, 507 U.S. 197 (1993). The wrong must result in some sort of injury that is compensable by monetary damages. Some of these include: loss of earnings capacity, pain and suffering, and reasonable medical expenses. (Cornell University School of Law, Legal Information Institute). Torts fall into one of three categories, intentional, negligent and strict liability. (Id.). Tort law is considered common law, or state-made law, following Donoghue v. Sullivan, [1932] UKHL 100, 1932 SC 31, [1932] AC 562, [1932] All ER Rep 1, in which the judges found that there is a duty of care toward one’s neighbor. The tort of negligence contains three basic elements. First there is a duty of care, a breach of that duty and an injury caused by that breach. Restatement (Second) of Torts § 552 (1977). As the law of tort evolves, some have argued that there are actually an expanded five elements that require proof of proximate causation and damages for injury. (Owen at 1673). The five elements in current usage are: (1) duty, (2) breach, (3) cause in fact, (4) proximate cause, and (5) harm. (Id.). Here we will discuss the basic three that have been in common usage before state-made law, duty, breach and cause. The duty of care is a type of social contract that imposes a certain degree of responsibility of an individual or organization held towards other members of society. Whether the defendant owes the plaintiff a duty depends upon the relationship between the defendant and the plaintiff. (Owen, 54 Vand. L. Rev. 767, (2001)). The duty element attaches only to the actor(s). For instance, in Ross v. Marshall, 426 F.3d 745 (2005), the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit found that the original actors had a duty of care but their parents did not. Breach of the duty of care is the next element that must be proven by the plaintiff. In other words, the person bringing suit must show that the defendant did not act as a reasonably prudent person acting under similar circumstances. (Cornell). “(T)he plaintiff seeks to establish that the failure of the defendant to act as a reasonable person caused the plaintiff's injury. (Id.). One of the leading cases on breach of duty is Palsgraf v. Long Island Railroad Company, 248 N.Y. 339, 162 N.E. 99 (N.Y. 1928). Justice Cardozo said, “Long Island Railroad’s liability for an inadvertent or unintentional act cannot be greater than it would be if the act had been intentional.” In this case, the railroad company could not have reasonably foreseen events as they unfolded. The proximate cause of the injury resulting from the breach of duty is the last of the basic three elements of negligence. (Hofstra). The previous, common law view held that proximate cause was the only way negligence occurred. Proximate cause was a very direct and literal term; that which was a direct A/B relationship, based on the doctrine of res ipsa loquitor (Latin for "the thing speaks for itself"). The Palsgraf court expanded that to a “Zone of Danger” beyond which an event cannot have been foreseen by the reasonable, prudent person. (1928). In MacPherson v. Buick Motor Co., 217 N.Y. 382, 111 N.E. 1050 (1916), Justice Benjamin Cardozo ended the privity factor required in the Donoghue decision, at odds with the common law. This allowed for products liability cases as a sub-set of the tort of negligence. Works Cited Cornell University School of Law, Legal Information Institute, available at http://topics.law.cornell.edu/wex/tort (last visited August 18, 2011). Donoghue v. Sullivan, [1932] UKHL 100, 1932 SC 31, [1932] AC 562, [1932] All ER Rep 1 Owen, David G., The Five Elements of Negligence, Hofstra Law Review, Volume 35, No. 4, Summer 2007. Owen, David G., Duty Rules, 54 VAND. L. REV. 767, 767-79 (2001). MacPherson v. Buick Motor Co., 217 N.Y. 382, 111 N.E. 1050 (1916). Palsgraf v. Long Island Railroad Company, 248 N.Y. 339, 162 N.E. 99 (N.Y. 1928). Restatement (Second) of Torts § 552 (1977). Ross v. Marshall, 426 F.3d 745 (2005). Smith v. United States, 507 U.S. 197 (1993). Read More
Cite this document
  • APA
  • MLA
  • CHICAGO
(“Tort of negligence Assignment Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 750 words”, n.d.)
Retrieved from https://studentshare.org/law/1430846-tort-of-negligence
(Tort of Negligence Assignment Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 750 Words)
https://studentshare.org/law/1430846-tort-of-negligence.
“Tort of Negligence Assignment Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 750 Words”, n.d. https://studentshare.org/law/1430846-tort-of-negligence.
  • Cited: 0 times
Comments (1)
Click to create a comment or rate a document
ro
rozella42 added comment 2 years ago
Student rated this paper as
Great paper! Used it to complete an assignment for a law course. It was easy as ABC, for the first time in my life.

CHECK THESE SAMPLES OF Tort of negligence

The Relationship between Contract and Tort in the Law of Obligations

.... In discussing this relationship, he states that the “ambiguity was never resolved”; the pervasive theme was the “friction on boundaries” between contract and tort and that the “scars are plainly visible in the Common law of the end of the twentieth century.”*6 The co-existence of breach of contract with the tort of negligence was also pointed out by Winfeld, who stated that there are “a large number of cases in which the foundation of action springs out of privity of contract between the parties but in which nevertheless the remedy is alternatively in contract or in tort.”*7 Yet, the classical view holds that there is a distinction between obligations under contract and tort, conditioned by the laissez faire doctrine in the will theory...
8 Pages (2000 words) Coursework

The Bolam Test of Negligence

The realistic effect of the test is that a judge will heed substantiation from experts in the suitable speciality and should decide whether the measures of the doctor/midwife/nurse etc. were appropriate. Frequently there are numerous acceptable ways of doing somewhat and conformity with any of these will mean that there was no breach of duty of care. Logically experts frequently disagree over these matters and the judge should decide whose substantiation is to be favored.
Professional men and women are administrated by the standard of care of a normal person of their profession or specialism: the test is the standard of the normal skilled man exercising and admitting to having that special skill. An expansion of this is the s...
10 Pages (2500 words) Coursework

All Possible Negligence Claims in the Business Law

.... They are arguing that they suffered lost business as a result and want to claim £10,000 as compensation for the profit that they would have made that day. In this case there would have to be actual damage to the computers from the power cut. It is conceivable that a power cut would cause the computers to crash and lose important information. If this was the case the business could be compensated for the damage and the lost business as a direct result; however as there is no actual damage there is no claim because under the tort of negligence pure economic loss cannot be compensated. Scenario 4: Baljit was walking past the building site when a piece of brick flew over the wall and struck her on the head. She was knocked unconscious...
10 Pages (2500 words) Assignment

Tort Law of the United Kingdom: 3 Problem Questions

Trespass on land, goods, and person is altogether the most common type of tort, but in all cases, the main concern is the allocation of responsibility for whatever losses are sustained. For anyone party to be held responsible for violation of the tort law, the claimant must establish that there is a duty of care and that there has been a breach of that duty to cause damage or loss to the claimant that needs to be compensated by an award of damages. There is a breach of the duty-of-care principle if the defendant is proven to have failed to do what a reasonable person will do in the situation presented.

Francesca was a chambermaid of good standing at Hulton hotel until a regular hotel guest stormed into the manager&rsquo...
8 Pages (2000 words) Case Study

Act Tortious: Homeowners File a Tort Claim against a Theme Park

In criminal law, the state is portrayed as the bigger offended party than the plaintiff such that if a defendant is proven guilty the state metes out the appropriate punishment.  It is different in tort cases, in which the plaintiff, whose more popular assignation now is “claimant,” is the victim of the alleged wrong.  Once the defendant is found liable he is directed by the court to pay damages to the claimant or else to desist from the wrongful activity through “injunctive relief.” Compensation and deterrence are two of the four main purposes of a tort, the other two being appeasement and justice (Williams, 1951). 

The types of torts in England and Wales are limited to trespass t...
9 Pages (2250 words) Case Study

The Distinction Between the Tort of Negligence and the Tort of Nuisance

There are many instances in which establishing a claim in private nuisance does not require proof of negligence and it, therefore, remains necessary to maintain the tort of private nuisance distinct from the tort of negligence. The discussion that follows will demonstrate the necessity by comparing and contrasting both torts.
The tort of negligence is founded on the principles enunciated in the House of Lords decision in Donoghue v Stevenson which essentially defines the duty of care and situations in which a breach of that duty will give rise to a claim in negligence. Lord Atkin explained that we are required to take all necessary precautions to prevent injury to our neighbours. He goes on to fully explain the duty of care i...
17 Pages (4250 words) Case Study

Issues Relating to Medical Negligence

In applying the test, it must be established that it would be reasonable for Doctor Green to have foreseen that the damage to Charles would have been caused as a result of any negligence or misconduct and as such, should have taken precautions against this. If we apply this to the current scenario, it is evident that as a trained medic, Doctor Green would have foreseen that failure to take proper care in diagnosing and treating Charles would result in damage to Charles’ health. This appears to be further bolstered by claims by consultant Doctor Brown that Charles may have healed normally had he been correctly diagnosed and treated by Doctor Green. As regards the liability of Wellington Hospital, as soon as Charles entered We...
10 Pages (2500 words) Coursework

Applied Land Law, Contract Law and Tort Law

There seems to be a lack of consideration to accompany the subsequent agreement between the parties for ABC Ltd. to pay the extra ₤10,000. In essence, ‘consideration’ refers to something of value, in a legal sense, flowing from Grabit to ABC Ltd. so as to enable Grabit to hold ABC Ltd. to its promise to pay that extra amount.
Grabit will obviously argue here that they are indeed doing something of value to ABC Ltd by building the extension of the warehouse. However, the problem is that this building of the extension is exactly what Grabit was already contractually bound to do under the ₤200,000 fixed price contract. As seen from Stilk v Myrick1, the general rule is that the performance of an existing contractual d...
11 Pages (2750 words) Assignment

The Issues as to Potential Civil Claims under the Torts of Negligence, Assault, and Battery

... of care, Freddie breached this duty of care and the breach caused Bertie actionable damage, which is not too remote. DUTY OF CARE The first hurdle for Bertie is to establish that Freddie owed Bertie a duty of care. The test for whether or not there is a legal duty of care was established in the case of Donoghue v Stevenson1. Lord Atkin asserted that a manufacturer owed a legal duty of care to the ultimate consumer of his product. In discussing duty of care as a legal concept in the tort of negligence, Lord Atkin established the “neighbour” principle. Lord Atkins continued to define the term “neighbour” in the legal sense as being “persons who are so closely and directly affected by my act that I ought to reasonably to have them...
8 Pages (2000 words) Case Study

Contract and tort law

Being a public organisation, the Council had the duty of ensuring that anyone who builds on the land adhered to the limitation and/or the potential limitations that the toxic substances found on the land caused.
Thus, in granting the authorisation to build on the land, the Council should have factored that in before considering whether to grant or reject the license to build. However, they went ahead and granted a license to Max which gave him the right to build or advertise for others to build on the land.
It is therefore conclusive that by granting the authorisation to build on the land, when the council was privy to information about the dangers of inhabiting the land and the potential freeze on the land, the council wa...
6 Pages (1500 words) Case Study
sponsored ads
We use cookies to create the best experience for you. Keep on browsing if you are OK with that, or find out how to manage cookies.

Let us find you another Assignment on topic Tort of negligence for FREE!

Contact Us