In this case when James touched the physically injured Ruth without fully aware of the details of first aid, he further damaged her. Application: In the Macpherson v Beat case, Professor Macpherson was confronted by a mob of students who silently threatened him. When he touched the shoulder of one student, the student called it assault. The professor thus, had to stand silently for more than 15 minutes till they all went back. The court ruled in favour of the plaintiff, the professor. In this case also, the Dominic had come charging at Tina, who had moved aside but was still scared stiff.
Dominic knew that playing ball at the public pool is dangerous and intentionally played ball in the pool, thus endangering other swimmers in the pool. Application: In the Murray v Ministry of Defence, the plaintiff’s case of false imprisonment was dismissed because the court had ruled that plaintiff knew of her restraint orders and therefore case of false imprisonment and restrain of individual liberty did not arise. In the present case, Leonie had locked their room from outside when she had left in hurry.
Application: Perpetual Trustees & National Executors of Tasmania Ltd v Perkins case had clearly defined that the ownership does not change even when the items are loaned to third party on long term. A painting owned by two sisters, was loaned to their brother. The brother had given it another brother, who died and the widow sold the painting to the National Gallery. The court ruled that the painting was a bailment at will and therefore, bailor’s title was better than bailee’s. Applying the same in this case, it can be said that the gold watch, owned by Michael should be returned to him when requested.
ARC can consult and verify the identity of Michael with the hospital authority and return his property without delay. Application: Fennell v Robson Excavation Pty Ltd case, the defendant
...Download file to see next pages Read More