Law of Torts: Negligence - Essay Example

In this case, whether or not negligence has occurred will be a matter of satisfying that: the defendant owed the plaintiff the duty of care; the defendant breached that duty of care; the plaintiff suffered injury or other damages; and the damage or injury is caused due to the breach of the duty of care owed to them. All these elements must, first be satisfied by the plaintiffs in order to be able to succeed in getting damages failure to which no damages will be awarded. The boys For the boys to be able to recover damages, first they will have to satisfy the court that the defendants owed them some duty of care, which is breached by the defendant, thereby resulting into injuries as a result of the breach of that duty (Keenan and Smith 2006, p.47-52). Based on the case, it is apparent that Cascades of Fire ltd owed the boys some duty of care, since it is under obligation to avoid causing harm, as the nature of its works is that which can potentially cause harm and injuries if care is not taken.

It is also evident that Jed and Cascade of Fire breached this duty of care by negligently allowing the boys to pick padlock on the warehouse gate without their knowledge. The court in this case will be concerned with the standard of care. In this case, it is apparent that Jed and Cascades of Fire as defendants failed to observe a standard of care, which a reasonable person would have exercised in the circumstance. If Jared and Cascades of Fire could have been careful, they would have not allowed the boys to get access to the padlock of the warehouse, thereby amounting to a breach of duty of care.

The breach of the duty of care also resulted into injury to the boys. As a result, the boys can potentially succeed in recovering damages for the injuries sustained due to the negligent acts of the defendants. It is also worth noting that the defendants may argue on the basis of contributory negligence. Contributory negligence occurs when the injured person is found to have contributed to the cause of their injury or loss (Adams 2008). However, since the boys still appear to be minors, they will be held to a different standard of care than adults.

According to Kelly, Hayward, Hammer and Hendy (2011) minor’s negligence is evaluated by the courts against what a reasonably careful person of the same age, experience and mental capacity would exercise under similar circumstances. In fact, very young minors are presumed to be incapable of negligence. Most jurisdictions hold that minors act upon childish instincts and impulses when determining injuries to minors. As such, Jed and Cascades of Fire ltd knew or ought to have known that the boys were around, or were likely to be present in the compound, and therefore ought to have exercised greater vigilance.

Therefore, despite the fact that the boys actually contributed to the cause of their injuries, they will still succeed in recovering the damages but the court will reduce the claim according to the extent they will have been found to have contributed to the damage or loss. As such, they should proceed and file a lawsuit against, Jed and Cascade of Fire Ltd. What the boys must also know is the time limit required in making a claim for damages arising from personal injuries. In this case, there is a time limit of three years within which the boys can file the lawsuit.

Law also requires that the documents be filed at least 90 days before the