Tort reform

When discussing Negligence, it is imperative that we first explorer the law of Tort. This is a wrongful act whether it was intentional or accidental, leading to one being injured (cited from Law.com). To demonstrate that the defendant has committed an act or omission it may be necessary to prove that both a standard duty of care and damage has resulted in negligent behaviour. A person in a professional occupation such as a chartered surveyor has a higher duty of care because their field of work…

to prove that her assistant was aware of the commitment he’d made in this contract and that the contract was intentionally breached (Yates, 121). Vicarious Liability. The concept of vicarious liability occurs when one person is responsible for the torts of another, even when they aren’t at fault.…

caused the harm to Ms. Palsgraf. The harm caused by the railroad co. would have to be measured in monetary damages. Disposition: Reversed. This decision is of importance because it establishes the idea of proximate cause as a limit on the scope of tort liability. Which means that the person can only be held liable for harm that is a reasonably foreseeable result of the wrongful act. Zone of danger is the reasonable space surrounding the foreseeable scope of the duty. It was not possible for…

Marcus Newell Beech-Nut Case Study Professor Finnerty 13 October 2015 Beech Nut Discussion Questions 1. In my opinion, LiCari did not overreact. I believe this because it is a felony to falsely label a product, which Beech Nut did with advertise on their products. This product was given to babies, it was second leading provider of baby products, which means mothers trusted this product for their small children. When I have my own children I want nothing but the best for them and Beech Nut…

On the facts, Theresa is the the plaintiff and AirMalaysia is the defendant. It is question of whether Theresa can claim any remedy for the losses she suffered because of the breach of the contract by AirMalaysia. The first and vital issue to consider is to determine if there is a binding contract between Theresa and AirMalaysia. In order to constitute a contract, there must be offer, acceptance, consideration and intention to create legal relation. (Law Teacher, 2013) It is obvious that Theresa…

According to Professor Ernest J. Weinrib, corrective justice is the idea that liability rectifies the injustice inflicted by one person on another. This idea is based on the fact that the parties are considered to be in an initial equilibrium stage before entering the contract but when this contract is breached one party (usually the defendant) gains while the other (usually the plaintiff) suffers from the contract. Corrective justice is the notion of correcting this inequality by giving back…

Case One From my reading of this case I am of the opinion that Matt has a genuine case against the accused. I believe that Matt should take legal action against his competitor for misleading advertising. The accused has broken the Consumers Protection Act (2007). Matt has a valid case because it is affecting his business and if this problem persists Matt could possibly lose his business. Outline of legal issues • The advertisement of lower priced products compared to those which are in Matt’s…

Parents argue that skis should not have been sold to Neal, their twelve-year old son due to the fact he ‘was clearly too young and inexperienced,’ but with a statement left so broad, who is to determine the criteria to be considered ‘too young and inexperienced’? Without a legal age limit statute to direct retail stores, such as Outdoor Outfitter (OO), who and who is not legally allowed to purchase skis, retailers, such as OO, are left to assume that the market for skis can be considered similar…

Clive and Jennie have sustained injuries at the Superposh Hotel, they may have a claim under the Occupiers’ Liability Act 1957 (OLA 1957) if they were lawful visitors, or the Occupiers’ Liability Act 1984 (OLA 984) if they were trespassers. Both acts cover only a result damaging from state of premises other damages is covered by negligence. In Ogwo v Taylor [1987] 2 WLR 988, injuries sustained by a fireman whilst fighting a fire at premises was covered by the ordinary law of negligence and not…

Contributory negligence is a common law tort where a plaintiff was completely barred from recovering damages if they (plaintiff) were negligent in any way for causing the accident. This would hold true even if the defendant’s negligence were greater and far more serious than the plaintiff’s (“Contributory Negligence,” n.d.). Our week #5 video provided an excellent history of the courts change from contributory negligence to comparative fault. The issue with contributory negligence, as stated…