Torts Rose Vassel 2012 TORTS LAWS1061. Rose VASSEL
|
|
- Shon Mitchell
- 5 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 TORTS LAWS1061 Rose VASSEL 1
2 DUTY OF CARE CATEGORIES Because negligence is an action on the case, the kind of harm is the most significant characteristic. Damage is the gist of the action and must be proved. Personal injury is one of the areas where the Civil Liability regime intervenes considerably, but more so in the stages of breach, causation and damages. The Acts in some places do also prevent a duty of care from arising or change the circumstances in which it arises. These include: mental harm, aspects of public liability of authorities, protection of volunteers and Good Samaritans. PHYSICAL HARM PHYSICAL HARM CAUSED BY AN ACT PHYSICAL HARM CAUSED BY OMISSION The rule for this is found in Donoghue v Stevenson [1932] AC 562 and is about reasonable foreseeability. This is the paradigm for the duty of care. Physical injury and property damage have the same requirements for the duty of care. You must take reasonable care to avoid acts or omissions which you can reasonably foresee would be likely to injure your neighbour... persons who are so closely Whether physical harm was caused by an act or omission may alter what is required to est. a duty of care. The important thing is defining the scope of the duty. This is bc. it is harder to prove the link bt. something that was not done, than it is for something that was done. Gummow J in RTA v Dederer (2007): whatever the scope, all duties of care are to be discharged by the exercise of reasonable care; it does not impose a duty to prevent potentially harmful conduct...duties of care are obligations of a particular scope, and that scope may be more or less expansive depending on the relationship in question... (1) Was it obvious? ; (2) Can it be avoided by the exercise of ordinary care? Romeo v Conservation Commission of the Northern Territory (1998) 192 CLR 431 Legal reasoning What was the scope of the duty of care required by the Conservation Commission to plaintiffs such a those in the position of Romeo? Did it extend to fencing off the area? Dixon J in Aiken v Kingborough Corporation: the public authority in control of... premises is under an obligation to take reasonable care to prevent injury to such a person through dangers arising from the state or condition of the premises which are not apparent and are not to be avoided by the exercise of ordinary care. Kirby J: On the scope of the duty - The entrant is only entitled to expect the measure of care appropriate to the nature of the land or premises entered and to the relationship which exists between the entrant and the occupier. The measure of care required will take into account the different ages, capacities, sobriety and advertance of the entrants. Nagle v Rottnest Island Authority (1993) 177 CLR 423 Hargrave v Goldman (1963) 110 CLR 40 2
3 Civil Liability Act s5f Meaning of obvious risk (1) For the purposes of this Division, an "obvious risk" to a person who suffers harm is a risk that, in the circumstances, would have been obvious to a reasonable person in the position of that person. (2) Obvious risks include risks that are patent or a matter of common knowledge. (3) A risk of something occurring can be an obvious risk even though it has a low probability of occurring. (4) A risk can be an obvious risk even if the risk (or a condition or circumstance that gives rise to the risk) is not prominent, conspicuous or physically observable. s5h No proactive duty to warn of obvious risk (1) A person ( the defendant ) does not owe a duty of care to another person ( the plaintiff ) to warn of an obvious risk to the plaintiff; (2) This section does not apply if: (a) the plaintiff has requested advice or information about the risk from the defendant, or (b) the defendant is required by a written law to warn the plaintiff of the risk, or (c) the defendant is a professional and the risk is a risk of the death of or personal personal injury to the plaintiff from the provision of a professional service by the defendant. (3) Subsection (2) does not give rise to a presumption of a duty to warn of a risk in the circumstances referred to in that subsection. NO DUTY TO RESCUE General Rule: Generally, a person will not be required to rescue another person unless they have created the risk or endangered the person by their own actions. There must be some additional reason why it is fair and reasonable that one person should be regarded as his brother s keeper and have legal obligations in that regard : Stovin v Wise [1996]. Stuarty v Kirkland-Veenstra: held that police did not owe a DOC to a person who was attempting to commit suicide where they came upon him with a hose attaching the exhaust to the inside of his car. He persuaded them he changed his mind but he later committed suicide. What if an attempt to rescue another, one made things worse? Common law possibility that liability may arise: Australia: no cases where D or nurse attending accident to give first aid were sued. Also few cases of volunteers being sued for injuries. UK: if attend in an emergency, Dr or nurse duty not to make situation worse. Concerns about these possibilities = CLA ss56-57 (2002 Good Samaritans provisions). Good Samaritans CLA s56 Who is a good samaritan For the purpose of this Part, a good samaritan is a person who, in good faith and without expectation of payment or other reward, comes to the assistance of a person who is apparently injured or at risk of being injured. s57 Protection of good samaritans (1) A good samaritan does not incur any personal civil liability in respect of any act or omission done or made by the good samaritan in an emergency when assisting a person who is apparently injured or at risk of being injured. (2) This section does not affect the vicarious liability of any other person for the acts or omissions of the good samaritan. 3
4 Protecting volunteers: CLA s61-66 s61 Protection of volunteers A volunteer does not incur any personal civil liability in respect of any act or omission done or made by the volunteer in good faith when doing community work: (a) organised by a community organisation, or (b) as an office holder of a community organisation. DUTIES TO THIRD PARTIES Controlling the conduct of others Smith v Leurs (1945) Dixon J said it is rare to find in the law a duty to control the conduct of third persons in the interest of the plaintiff and there has to be a special relationship to found a duty. The law may attribute the conduct of one person to another where there is a nondelegable duty - they create situations where the D is required to control the activities of others as part of the duty. Examples where the relationship between two parties may mean that one has a duty to take reasonable care to protect the other from criminal behaviour of third parties : Employer and employee (Modbury per Gleeson CJ at [26]); School and pupil (Modbury per Gleeson CJ at [26]); Bailor and bailee (Modbury per Gleeson CJ at [26]); Prison for prisoner on remand (L v Commonwealth (1976) prisoner sexually assaulted and injured Cth owed DOC to keep remand prisoners separate from other prisoners). Modbury Triangle Shopping Centre v Anzil (2000) 205 CLR 254 PRODUCT LIABILITY After Donoghue v Stevenson whether an item was a dangerous thing or not was irrelevant = determine whether there would be liability for a defective product based on the ordinary principles of negligence. When a person is injured by a product, they can seek to recover damages through: Contract for breach of warranty; Contract for breach of implied term as to fitness of the product; Bring an action under ACL. One possible alternative avenue is the Australian Consumer Law Pt 3-5 Liability of manufacturers of goods with safety defects or Chs 2 and 3 General Protections and Specific Protections [of consumers] (Note: this was formerly all covered under the Trade Practices Act). Defects covered by the tort of negligence can include defective manufacture, defective design, and even defective marketing i.e. failure to label properly. 4
5 Graham Barclay Oysters Pty Ltd v Ryan (2000) 177 ALR 18 (Full FCA) Lindgren J: On the lack of evidence of any previous outbreak of health problems + lack of knowledge of any problem on the part of Mr Barclay, the Barclay companies duty of care did not reasonably require them either to take the course that his Honour outlined or to suffer a closure of their business until somehow they could be completely assured that they were putting into the market a product that was free of defect. Kiefel J: A d Wyong Shire Council v Shirt test for this case Graham Barclay Oysters Pty Ltd v Ryan; Ryan v Great Lakes Council; State of New South Wales (2002) 211 CLR 540 HCA As per Wyong Shire Council v Shirt: First ask: whether a reasonable man in the D s position would have foreseen that his conduct involved a risk of injury to the P or to a class of persons including the P, if yes, then it is then for the tribunal of fact to determine what a reasonable man would do by way of response to the risk and this requires a consideration of the magnitude of the risk and the degree of the probability of its occurrence, along with the expense, difficulty and inconvenience of taking alleviating action and any other conflicting responsibilities which the D may have. 5
6 PSYCHIATRIC HARM CONCEPT OF PSYCHIATRIC HARM Nervous shock is the term usually used but it means metal injury/psychiatric harm. P s have recovered compensation for psychiatric harm where the psychiatric harm: followed an injury to the self - where it is consequential (or parasitic ) mental harm; (Donoghue) developed after exposure to a situation of danger creating fear for the self (Victorian Railways Cmsr v Coultas), or within the zone of physical risk; (Coultas, Bourhill v Young) developed after exposure to a situation where the P was safe from physical harm but feared for relatives; (Hambrook v Stokes) followed a situation where a relative has been badly injured or killed and the P saw or heard the accident, or the aftermath of the accident; (Jaensch v Coffey) and where a rescuer of workmate developed psychiatric injury after witnessing a horrific scene. A person who has not been physically harmed may suffer from mental or psychiatric harm bc. of negligence. The DOC will arise bc. of a duty in respect of psychiatric harm. To bring an action in negligence for nervous shock of pure psychiatric injury, the P must show that it was reasonably foreseeable that a person in the P s position would suffer psychiatric harm if the D carried out the act contemplated. Harm must be a form that is compensable, must be recognised form of psychiatric injury - expert evidence. DUTY TO AVOID INFLICTING PSYCHIATRIC HARM Duty to avoid inflicting psychiatric harm has traditionally had particular rules to be satisfied bc. of concern it could be faked too easily and not as real as physical harm. special rules such as had to be frightened for oneself or to have been physically presence at an accident where a person was hurt. Most of these rule have since been ameliorated. Tame v New South Wales; Annetts v Australian Stations Pty Limited (2002) 211 CLR 317 Tame: sergeant at accident filled in form saying she was drunk when she wasn t. Annetts: Son working on cattle station and D promised parents that he would be supervised - 7wks later sent alone to caretake remote cattle station - died in desert. Gleeson CJ: whether it is reas. to require one person to have in contemplation injury of the kind suffered by another and to take reasonable care to guard against such injury. Gummow + Kirby JJ: Rejected normal fortitude test, sudden shock and immediate aftermath: Normal fortitude - not a precondition. Rather, test is one of reasonable foreseeability, liability is imposed for consequences which the D, judged by the standard of the reasonable person, ought to have foreseen. Not necessary that particular type of disorder be reasonably foreseeable, enough that psychiatric illness is RF. Sudden shock - Brennan J in Jaensch v Coffey, but not accepted by majority of the HCA. should not be accepted as pre-condition for recovery. Direct perception and immediate aftermath - also not accepted by HCA majority by may be considered, just not determinative. Distance in time and space from distressing phenomenon and means of communication or acquisition of knowledge concerning the phenomenon may be relevant to assessing R.F., causation and remoteness of damage in a common law action for negligence. there is no legal duty to break news gently. 6
7 DUTY TO AVOID INFLICTING PSYCHIATRIC HARM CONT D Over the years various limitations and controls have been suggested and then rejected: (1) Nervous shock not, in ordinary course of things, recognised as flowing from neg. Rejected HCA in Mount Isa Mines Ltd v Pusey (1970) + Jaensch v Coffey (1984). (2) P could only recover in respect of nervous shock where it is caused by fear of immediate physical injury to the P; still considered insufficiently proximate if the P s shock comes from realisation that physical injury might have happened to herself through a past incident: Wilks v Haines (1991). (3) Members of family of deceased may recover on basis that fear of immediate injury to member of family might be treated same way as fear of immediate injury to oneself. Untenable once courts held family members could recover even if only involved in aftermath (don t need to be physically present). (4) P may only recover damages for nervous shock resulting from what was observed w/ unaided senses by the P and not that resulting from what the P was told about the accident. (5) Where the news conveyed is negligently false, there is authority for holding the conveyor of it liable: Barnes v Commonwelath (1937) 37 SR (NSW) 311. Mount Isa Mines Ltd v Pusey (1970) 125 CLR 383 : Due to neg. of D, operated power plant, electric arc created which severely injured 2 employees. Other employee, P, assisted one man who died 9 days later. Ruling: Trial judge found D should have anticipated that other employees would assist and suffer nervous shock and perhaps injuries. Did not find that specific mental illness was foreseeable but that some psychiatric injury could have been foreseen. More than mere grief or sorrow.. Judgment for P upheld by QldSC (Full) and HCA. Gifford v Strang Patrick Stevedoring Pty Ltd (2003) 214 CLR 269 : Man crushed to death by forklift whilst working for employer. 3 children not witnesses but claimed damages for psychiatric injury upon hearing of the incident. Ruling: All except Callinan J rejected sudden shock + direct perception as determining factors. Gleeson CJ stressed again that reasonable foreseeability be really reasonable. Requirement of recognisable psychiatric illness again reiterated. Koehler v Cerebos (Australia) Ltd (2005) 222 CLR 44; HCA 15 The central inquiry remains whether, in all the circumstances, the risk of a P... sustaining a recognisable psychiatric illness was reasonably foreseeable, in the sense that the risk was not far fetched or fanciful. MENTAL HARM AND THE CLA CIVIL LIABILITY ACT REGIMES Gifford v Strang Patrick Stevedoring Co (2003) 214 CLR 269 FACTS:Man crushed to death by forklift whilst working for employer. 3 children not witnesses but claimed damages for psychiatric injury upon hearing of the incident. RULING: R s argued that s4(1)(b) of the Law Reform (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1944 (NSW) required New CLAs are worded differently from old ones and there are significant differences bt. states. NSW has most stringent provisions whilst other states are more reflective of common law post Tames/Annetts. See differences bt. NSW CLA s30 and WA CLA s5s. 7
8 Wicks v State Rail Authority of New South Wales; Sheehan v State Rail Authority of New South Wales (2010) 241 CLR 60; [2010] HCA police officers called to scene of train derailment - spent several hours trying to lessen distress and suffering of survivors - 7 people died - SRA admitted negligence. s32 defines or controls what otherwise would be a duty of care arising at common law, its falls for consideration before the limitation upon entitlement to damages imposed by s30(2). Section 32, taking the form that it does, must be understood against the background provided by the common law of ngeligence in relation to psychiatric injury as stated by this Court in Tame v New South Wales the notion of shock, in the sense of a sudden and disturbing impression on the mind or feelings. Para 31 - the question of foreseeability...must be judged before the accident happened. MENTAL HARM AND FEMINIST CRITIQUE 8
Negligence Case Law and Notes
Negligence Case Law and Notes Subsections Significance Case Principle Established Duty of Care Original Negligence case Donoghue v Stevenson [1932] ac 562 The law takes no cognisance of carelessness in
More informationVicarious Liability: imposed in certain relationships eg. Employee/ Employer
CONCURRENT LIABILITY: VICARIOUS LIABILITY AND INTRODUCTION TO!" NEGLIGENCE Vicarious Liability: imposed in certain relationships eg. Employee/ Employer Vicarious liability may exist if the wrongful act
More informationTwo elements:! 1. Employer/employee relationship! 2. The tortious conduct took place during the course of the employment.!
TORTS LAW EXAM NOTES [ VICARIOUS LIABILITY ] (if it applies) Imposed on certain relationships (e.g. employer/employee, principal/agent, partnerships) Policy reasons: 1. a person who employs others to advance
More informationTORTS LAW CASE NOTES
TORTS LAW CASE NOTES LAWSKOOL PTY LTD CONTENTS Graham Barclay Oysters Pty Ltd v Ryan [2002] HCA 54... 3 Romeo v Conservation Commission of the Northern Territory (1998) 192 CLR 431... 9 Modbury Triangle
More informationCivil Liability Amendment (Personal Responsibility) Act 2002 No 92
New South Wales Civil Liability Amendment (Personal Responsibility) Act 2002 No 92 Contents Page 1 Name of Act 2 2 Commencement 2 3 Amendment of Civil Liability Act 2002 No 22 2 4 Consequential repeals
More informationMedical Indemnity Forum 24 th August. Tort Law Reform. Professor Loane Skene
Medical Indemnity Forum 24 th August Tort Law Reform Professor Loane Skene Until the Medical Indemnity crisis civil liability was mostly common law Claims rapidly increased in number, but even more in
More informationNegligence: Approaching the duty of care
Negligence: Approaching the duty of care Introduction: Elements of negligence: - The defendant owed the plaintiff a duty of care. - That the duty must have been breached. - That breach must have caused
More informationDUTY OF CARE. The plaintiff must firstly establish that the defendant owed hum a duty of care: this arises where:
DUTY OF CARE REASONABLE FORESEEABILITY AND SALIENT FEATURES To recover damages in negligence, a plaintiff must firstly establish that the defendant owed him a duty of care. In broad terms, a duty of care
More informationTORTS SUMMARY LAWSKOOL PTY LTD
SUMMARY LAWSKOOL PTY LTD CONTENTS INTRODUCTION TO NELIGENCE 7 DUTY OF CARE 8 INTRODUCTION 8 ELEMENTS 10 Reasonable foreseeability of the class of plaintiffs 10 Reasonable foreseeability not alone sufficient
More informationFalse imprisonment à Direct & intentional/negligent total restraint of the freedom of movement of P by the D without legal authority
False imprisonment à Direct & intentional/negligent total restraint of the freedom of movement of P by the D without legal authority Voluntary/positive o Same as battery (see above) Fault (intention/negligent)
More informationAssessing Psychiatric Injury and the New CTP Regime. Presented by Luke Gray Partner - Finlaysons
Assessing Psychiatric Injury and the New CTP Regime Presented by Luke Gray Partner - Finlaysons SA CTP Scheme OLD SCHEME MVA s on or before 30 June 2013. NEW OR CURRENT SCHEME MVA s on or after 1 July
More informationTame v New South Wales Annetts v Australian Stations Pty Ltd
Tame v New South Wales Annetts v Australian Stations Pty Ltd (2002) 191 ALR 449; [2002] HCA 35 (High Court of Australia) (relevant to Chapter 5, under heading Nervous Shock on p 126) The ordinary principles
More informationLAWS1203 Torts 1 st Semester 2007
LAWS1203 Torts 1 st Semester 2007 How to Use this Script: These sample exam answers are based on problems done in past years. Since these answers were written, the law has changed and the subject may have
More informationComing to a person s aid when off duty
Coming to a person s aid when off duty Everyone might, at times, be first on scene when someone needs assistance. Whether it s coming across a car accident, seeing someone collapse in the shops, the sporting
More informationCaltex Refineries (Qld) Pty Limited v Stavar
Caltex Refineries (Qld) Pty Limited v Stavar (2009) 75 NSWLR 649; [2009] NSWCA 258 Supreme Court of New South Wales, Court of Appeal (This case comes after Graham Barclay Oysters Pty Ltd v Ryan; Ryan v
More informationSIMPLE'APPLICATION'TESTS' 39'
BREACH' WHO'IS'THE'REASONABLE'PERSON' FORESEEABILITY' CAUSATION'(CLA)' CAUSATION'(COMMON'LAW)' NOVUS'ACTUS' REMOTENESS' DEFENCES'TO'NEGLIGENCE' VICARIOUS'LIABILITY' NON?DELEGABLE'DUTY' BREACH'OF'STATUTORY'DUTY'
More informationPRELIMINARIES 1 1. Involving public authority 1 2. Nature of harm 1 A. Bodily injury 1 B. Mental harm: psychological or psychiatric injury (WA 1958 s
PRELIMINARIES 1 1. Involving public authority 1 2. Nature of harm 1 A. Bodily injury 1 B. Mental harm: psychological or psychiatric injury (WA 1958 s 67) 1 C. Property damage 2 D. Pure economic loss 2
More informationmatter of fact A Breach of Duty: Identify the Risks
Table of Contents Breach of Duty:... 2 Inherent Risk... 4 Obvious Risk... 4 Causation... 4 Remoteness... 6 Defences to Negligence... 6 Volens Contributory negligence Unlawful conduct Statute of Limitation
More informationCASE NOTE PROSPER THE GOVERNMENT, SUFFER THE PRACTITIONER: THE GRAHAM BARCLAY OYSTERS LITIGATION INTRODUCTION
2003 Case Note: Graham Barclay Oysters Pty Ltd v Ryan 727 CASE NOTE PROSPER THE GOVERNMENT, SUFFER THE PRACTITIONER: THE GRAHAM BARCLAY OYSTERS LITIGATION I INTRODUCTION The Graham Barclay Oysters litigation
More informationNEGLIGENCE. Wrongs Act 1958 (Vic) s43 Negligence means failure to exercise reasonable care.
NEGLIGENCE Wrongs Act 1958 (Vic) s43 Negligence means failure to exercise reasonable care. Negligence is; - The failure to do something that a reasonable person would do (omission), or - Doing something
More information3003 Negligence Law Final Exam Notes Griffith University
3003 Negligence Law Final Exam Notes Griffith University Week 4: Elements of Negligence: 1. Duty of Care 2. Breach of Duty 3. Causation 4. Defences/Damages Legislation: Civil Liability Act 2003 (Qld),
More informationCivil Liability Act 2002
Western Australia Civil Liability Act 2002 As at 01 Jan 2013 Version 03-j0-02 Western Australia Civil Liability Act 2002 CONTENTS Part 1 Preliminary 1. Short title 2 2. Commencement 2 3. Terms used 2
More informationTort proceedings as an accountability mechanism against decisions made by the Department of Immigration
Tort proceedings as an accountability mechanism against decisions made by the Department of Immigration Immigration Law Conference, Sydney 24-25 February 2017 1. The focus of immigration law practitioners
More informationWhen do parole authorities owe a duty of care to those injured by prisoners on parole? By Martin Cuerden
When do parole authorities owe a duty of care to those injured by prisoners on parole? By Martin Cuerden The responsibility of parole authorities for offences com m itted by those on parole is a topical
More informationSIMPLE'APPLICATION'TESTS' 39'
BREACH' WHO'IS'THE'REASONABLE'PERSON' FORESEEABILITY' CAUSATION'(CLA)' CAUSATION'(COMMON'LAW)' NOVUS'ACTUS' REMOTENESS' DEFENCES'TO'NEGLIGENCE' VICARIOUS'LIABILITY' NON?DELEGABLE'DUTY' BREACH'OF'STATUTORY'DUTY'
More informationPublic Authorities and Private Individuals - What Difference?: Romeo v Consemtion Commission of the
Public Authorities and Private Individuals - What Difference?: Romeo v Consemtion Commission of the Northern Territory Susan Barton BALLB student, The University of Queensland Once upon a time public authorities
More informationREMOTENESS OF DAMAGES
REMOTENESS OF DAMAGES certainly now the rule about liability for the tort of negligence and it is a matter of convenience whether we say that where the damage is not of this kind there may be a breach
More informationNegligence 1. Duty of Care 2. Breach of duty of care p 718 c) p 724
Negligence 1. Duty of Care Donoghue v Stevenson [1932] AC 562 - a duty of care could exist in any situation where loss, damage or injury to one party was reasonable foreseeable (foreseeable harm) - the
More informationClient Update June 2008
Highlights Relevance Of This Update Introduction Facts Of The Case High Court Ruling...2 The Decision Of The Court Of Appeal Foreseeability Of Damage Proximity The Class Of Persons Whose Claims Should
More informationTorts Exam Notes. Topics: 1. Damages o Compensatory! Economic (pecuniary)! Non-economic (non-pecuniary) o Aggravated o Exemplary/punitive
Torts Exam Notes Topics: 1. Damages o Compensatory! Economic (pecuniary)! Non-economic (non-pecuniary) o Aggravated o Exemplary/punitive 5. Duty of Care o Reasonably foreseeable? o Established relationship
More informationTWO NOTES ON RECENT DEVELOPMENTS CONCERNING 'PROXIMITY' IN NEGLIGENCE ACTIONS PROXIMITY AND NEGLIGENT ADVICE THE SAN SEBASTIAN CASE
TWO NOTES ON RECENT DEVELOPMENTS CONCERNING 'PROXIMITY' IN NEGLIGENCE ACTIONS PROXIMITY AND NEGLIGENT ADVICE THE SAN SEBASTIAN CASE Alex Bruce* 1. Introduction In November 1986, the High Court handed down
More informationContents. Table of Statutes. Table of Secondary Legislation. Table of Cases. General Principles of Liability
Contents Table of Statutes Table of Secondary Legislation Table of Cases Chapter 1: General Principles of Liability 1.1 Introduction 1.2 Interests protected 1.3 The mental element in tort 1.3.1 Malice
More informationMitchell v Glasgow City Council [2009] UKHL 11, [2009] 1 AC 874, [2009] 2 WLR 481, [2009] 3 All ER 205 HL
Mitchell v Glasgow City Council [2009] UKHL 11, [2009] 1 AC 874, [2009] 2 WLR 481, [2009] 3 All ER 205 HL Summary James Mitchell, 72, was attacked in July 2001 with an iron bar by his neighbour, James
More informationThis is the authors final peered reviewed (post print) version of the item published as: Available from Deakin Research Online:
This is the authors final peered reviewed (post print) version of the item published as: Hayward, Benjamin 2013, Tort, cinema and violent crime: An Australian perspective, Alternative Law Journal, vol.
More informationDO AUSTRALIAN FIRE BRIGADES OWE A COMMON LAW DUTY OF CARE? A REVIEW OF THREE RECENT CASES
DO AUSTRALIAN FIRE BRIGADES OWE A COMMON LAW DUTY OF CARE? A REVIEW OF THREE RECENT CASES MICHAEL EBURN The law regarding the fire service s liability for alleged negligence in the way they plan for or
More informationRECONCILING DUTY OF CARE AND BREACH Justice David Ashley Court of Appeal Supreme Court of Victoria
RECONCILING DUTY OF CARE AND BREACH Justice David Ashley Court of Appeal Supreme Court of Victoria 1 In Australia, the common law s contribution to the imperial march of the tort of negligence, in the
More informationContract and Tort Law for Engineers
Contract and Tort Law for Engineers Christian S. Tacit Tel: 613-599-5345 Email: ctacit@tacitlaw.com Canadian Systems of Law There are two systems of law that operate in Canada Common Law and Civil Law
More informationBernadette Bain The College of The Bahamas 1
ORIGINAL ARTICLES Nervous Shock: Time and Space Bernadette Bain The College of The Bahamas 1 ABSTRACT Liability for psychiatric injury, also known as nervous shock, may pose several challenges when considered
More informationLAW203 Torts Week 1 Law and Theory CH 1 + 2
LAW203 Torts Week 1 Law and Theory CH 1 + 2 Tort Law Categories Intentional/Trespass Torts Trespass to Person (Assault, Battery & False Imprisonment) Trespass to Land Trespass to Goods (including Conversion
More informationNew South Wales v Lepore Samin v Queensland Rich v Queensland
Samin v Queensland Rich v Queensland (2003) 195 ALR 412; [2003] HCA 4 (High Court of Australia) (relevant to Chapter 12, under headings Course of Employment on p 379, and Non-Delegable Duties on p 386)
More informationTORTS SPECIFIC TORTS NEGLIGENCE
TORTS A tort is a private civil wrong. It is prosecuted by the individual or entity that was wronged against the wrongdoer. One aim of tort law is to provide compensation for injuries. The goal of the
More informationSUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND
SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND CITATION: Peat v Lin & ors [2004] QSC 219 PARTIES: ROBERT EMMET PEAT (plaintiff/respondent) and YANCHUN LEONA LIN (first defendant) and RENNIE JACK BARNES (second defendant)
More informationWeek 2 - Damages in Contract. The plaintiff simply needs to show that there was a breach of contract
Week 2 - Damages in Contract In order for the court to award the plaintiff compensatory damages in contract, it must find that: a) Does the plaintiff have a cause of action in contract (e.g breach of contract)?
More informationPersonal Responsibility: Recent Developments in the New South Wales Courts
Personal Responsibility: Recent Developments in the New South Wales Courts Limitation Act Developments with the Concept of Discoverability Preamble: In late 1990s and the early years of this century the
More informationDoes a hospital owe a duty of care when discharging a mentally ill patient?
Does a hospital owe a duty of care when discharging a mentally ill patient? In November 2014 the High Court of Australia unanimously allowed an appeal from a decision of the New South Wales Court of Appeal,
More informationProfiting from your own mistakes: Common law liability and working directors
Profiting from your own mistakes: Common law liability and working directors Author: Tim Wardell Special Counsel Edwards Michael Lawyers Profiting from your own mistakes: Common law liability and working
More informationNERVOUS SHOCK - THE OPENING OF THE FLOODGATES
NERVOUS SHOCK - THE OPENING OF THE FLOODGATES by G. L. FRICKE* A plaintiff in an action of negligence cannot recover damages for a 'shock' however grievous, which was no more than an immediate emotional
More informationAnglo-American Contract and Torts. Prof. Mark P. Gergen. 11. Scope of Liability (Proximate Cause)
Anglo-American Contract and Torts Prof. Mark P. Gergen 11. Scope of Liability (Proximate Cause) 1) Duty/Injury 2) Breach 3) Factual cause 4) Legal cause/scope of liability 5) Damages Proximate cause Duty
More informationSwain v Waverley Municipal Council
[2005] HCA 4 (High Court of Australia) (relevant to Chapter 6, under new heading Role of Judge and Jury, on p 256) In a negligence trial conducted before a judge and jury, questions of law are decided
More informationHorsey and Rackley, Tort Law, Annotated Opinion White v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police
White and Others Respondents v Chief Constable of and Others Appellants House of Lords 3 December 1998 [1998] UKHL 45 [1999] 2 A.C. 455 Lord Browne-Wilkinson, Lord Griffiths, Lord Goff of Chieveley, Lord
More informationCASE NOTE ROADS AND TRAFFIC AUTHORITY OF NEW SOUTH WALES V DEDERER *
CASE NOTE ROADS AND TRAFFIC AUTHORITY OF NEW SOUTH WALES V DEDERER * NEGLIGENCE AND THE EXUBERANCE OF YOUTH PAM STEWART AND GEOFF MONAHAN [This case note examines the decision of the High Court of Australia
More informationLAWS1100 Final Exam Notes
LAWS1100 Final Exam Notes Topic 4&5: Tort Law and Business (*very important) Relevant chapter: Ch.3 Applicable law: - Law of torts law of negligence (p.74) Torts (p.70) - The word tort meaning twisted
More informationDistillers Co (Biochemicals) Ltd v. Thompson. [1971] AC 458 (Privy Council on appeal from the New South Wales Court of Appeal)
Distillers Co (Biochemicals) Ltd v. Thompson [1971] AC 458 (Privy Council on appeal from the New South Wales Court of Appeal) The place of a tort (the locus delicti) is the place of the act (or omission)
More informationLegal Liability in Adventure Tourism
Legal Liability in Adventure Tourism Ross Cloutier Bhudak Consultants Ltd. www.bhudak.com The Legal System in Canada Common Law Records creating a foundation of cases useful as a source of common legal
More informationBREACH OF DUTY. CLA s 5C outlines some relevant principles in breach of duty:
BREACH OF DUTY Occurs when the defendant s conduct does not meet the objective standard of care of the reasonable person. A different standard of care can be applied based on age (McHale v Watson), as
More informationUNIVERSITY OF BALLARAT SCHOOL OF BUSINESS. BL FUNDAMENTALS OF LAW First Semester
UNIVERSITY OF BALLARAT SCHOOL OF BUSINESS bl502 tort sem12003 BL502 -- FUNDAMENTALS OF LAW First Semester -- 2003 TOPIC TWO INTRODUCTION TO THE LAW OF TORT: WITH THE EMPHASIS ON NEGLIGENCE LECTURE GUIDE
More informationWhat does the Prepare, Stay and Defend or Leave Early policy mean for me?
What does the Prepare, Stay and Defend or Leave Early policy mean for me? Legal liabilities of emergency workers and emergency-service organisations in South Australia Bushfire Cooperative Research Centre
More informationJAENSCH V. COFFEY' 1 64 Melbourne University Law Review [Vol. 15, June '851
1 64 Melbourne University Law Review [Vol. 15, June '851 In conclusion Brooking J. stated that in his opinion 'if a dealer is permitted to carry on business as such under this trust deed creditors of the
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE January 8, 2003 Session
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE January 8, 2003 Session CINDY R. LOURCEY, ET AL. v. ESTATE OF CHARLES SCARLETT Appeal from the Circuit Court for Wilson County No. 12043 Clara Byrd, Judge
More informationSample. Aims of this Chapter. 2.1 Introduction. Outline
Chapter 2: The Duty of Care Outline 2.1 Introduction 2.2 The neighbour test 2.3 The three-stage test from Caparo Industries plc v Dickman [1990] 2.4 The role of public policy 2.5 Psychological/psychiatric
More informationChapter 2: Negligence: The Duty of Care General Principles and Public Policy
Chapter 2: Negligence: The Duty of Care General Principles and Public Policy Outline 2.1 Introduction 2.2 Donoghue v Stevenson [1932] 2.3 The three-stage test: foreseeability, proximity and fair, just
More informationTOPIC 2: LEGAL REMEDIES (DAMAGES - IN TORT AND CONTRACT)
TOPIC 2: LEGAL REMEDIES (DAMAGES - IN TORT AND CONTRACT) Damages in tort to award expectation loss Damages in contract to award for the compensation of expected benefits/disappointed expectations in both
More informationCHAPTER 35. DUTY OF CARE TO THE PUBLIC
CHAPTER 35. DUTY OF CARE TO THE PUBLIC INTRODUCTION Collecting institutions are natural repositories of traps, dangers and hazards and every organisation that opens it doors to the public has a duty to
More informationCanadian Systems of Law Contract and Tort Law for Professionals There are two systems of law that operate in Canada: Common Law and Civil Law.
Canadian Systems of Law Contract and Tort Law for Professionals There are two systems of law that operate in Canada: Common Law and Civil Law. Common Law operates in all Canadian Provinces and territories
More informationSUPPLEMENT TO CHAPTER 20
Plaintiff S157/2002 v Commonwealth (2003) 195 ALR 24 The text on pages 893-94 sets out s 474 of the Migration Act, as amended in 2001 in the wake of the Tampa controversy (see Chapter 12); and also refers
More informationInsurance and Reinsurance Forum
Insurance and Reinsurance Forum PROPORTIONATE LIABILITY - LEGISLATIVE REFORMS AND THEIR IMPLICATIONS Andrea Martignoni and Philip Hopley 1 1. What does proportionate liability mean? Proportionate liability
More informationProfessor DeWolf Summer 2014 Torts August 18, 2014 SAMPLE ANSWER TO FINAL EXAM MULTIPLE CHOICE
Professor DeWolf Summer 2014 Torts August 18, 2014 SAMPLE ANSWER TO FINAL EXAM MULTIPLE CHOICE 1. (a) Is incorrect, because from Dempsey s perspective the injury was not substantially certain to occur.
More informationClinical negligence by Marc Cornock Senior Lecturer Faculty of Health, Wellbeing and Social Care The Open University
Clinical negligence by Marc Cornock Senior Lecturer Faculty of Health, Wellbeing and Social Care The Open University Address: Faculty of Health, Wellbeing and Social Care The Open University Horlock Building
More informationANSWER A TO ESSAY QUESTION 5
ANSWER A TO ESSAY QUESTION 5 Sally will bring products liability actions against Mfr. based on strict liability, negligence, intentional torts and warranty theories. Strict Products Liability A strict
More informationHURT PROVING CAUSATION IN CHRONIC PAIN CASES
Posted on: January 1, 2011 HURT PROVING CAUSATION IN CHRONIC PAIN CASES One of the most significant challenges we face as personal injury lawyers is proving chronic pain in cases where there is no physical
More informationDamages in Tort 6. Damages in Contract 18. Restitution 27. Rescission 32. Specific Performance 38. Account of Profits 40.
LW401 REMEDIES Damages in Tort 6 Damages in Contract 18 Restitution 27 Rescission 32 Specific Performance 38 Account of Profits 40 Injunctions 43 Mareva Orders and Anton Piller Orders 49 Rectification
More informationMARK SCHEME for the May/June 2011 question paper for the guidance of teachers 9084 LAW. 9084/43 Paper 4, maximum raw mark 75
UNIVERSITY OF CAMBRIDGE INTERNATIONAL EXAMINATIONS GCE Advanced Level MARK SCHEME for the May/June 2011 question paper for the guidance of teachers 9084 LAW 9084/43 Paper 4, maximum raw mark 75 This mark
More informationTorts: Exam Notes LAW5003 Trimester 1, 2016
Torts: Exam Notes LAW5003 Trimester 1, 2016 1 of 58 Trespass to the Person 4 Battery 4 Assault 6 False Imprisonment 8 Defences 10 Consent 10 Self-defence, defence of another or defence to property 11 Necessity
More informationMARK SCHEME for the May/June 2010 question paper for the guidance of teachers 9084 LAW. 9084/43 Paper 43, maximum raw mark 75
UNIVERSITY OF CAMBRIDGE INTERNATIONAL EXAMINATIONS GCE Advanced Level MARK SCHEME for the May/June 2010 question paper for the guidance of teachers 9084 LAW 9084/43 Paper 43, maximum raw mark 75 This mark
More informationTORT LAW. Third Edition. Lewis N. Klar, Q.C. B.A., B.C.L., LL.M. Professor of Law University of Alberta THOMSON - ^ CARSWELL
TORT LAW Third Edition Lewis N. Klar, Q.C. B.A., B.C.L., LL.M. Professor of Law University of Alberta THOMSON - ^ CARSWELL TABLE OF CONTENTS Preface Table ofcases v xix Chapter 1 INTRODUCTION TO TORT LÄW
More information~~~~~ Week 6. Element of a Crime
~~~~~ Week 6 Element of a Crime PHYSICAL ELEMENTS OF A CRIME (AR) Physical elements may refer to: o A specified form of conduct such as: An act; An omission; or There is a CL duty not to cause harm to
More informationWORK HEALTH AND SAFETY BRIEFING
NATIONAL RESEARCH CENTRE FOR OHS REGULATION WORK HEALTH AND SAFETY BRIEFING Work Health and Safety Briefing In this Briefing This Work Health and Safety Briefing presents three key cases. The cases have
More informationThe suggestions made in the report for law reform are intended to apply prospectively.
SUMMARY Royal Commission Research Project Sentencing for Child Sexual Abuse in Institutional Contexts July 2015 This research report was commissioned and funded by the Royal Commission into Institutional
More informationChapter II, Book III, Code Civil Of Intentional and Unintentional Wrongs
Chapter II, Book III, Code Civil Of Intentional and Unintentional Wrongs Art. 1382 (now Art. 1240) Any act whatever of man, which causes damage to another, obliges the one by whose fault it occurred, to
More informationLIMITATION OF ACTIONS PROVISIONS OF THE ACL
TIME'S UP! LIMITATION OF ACTIONS PROVISIONS OF THE ACL 36 PRECEDENT ISSUE 106 SEPTEMBER / OCTOBER 2011 Photo Dreamstime.com. Many of the new provisions of the Australian Consumer Law (the ACL) and the
More informationThis fact sheet covers:
Legal information for Australian community organisations This fact sheet covers: laws in Australia What is defamation? Who can be defamed? Who can be sued for defamation? Defences Apologies and offers
More informationCONSUMER V CORPORATION: COMMERCIAL CONTRACT LITIGATION
LEGALWISE SEMINAR CONTRACTS LAW DISPUTES: KEY ISSUES AND HOTSPOTS Friday, 8 March 2018 Parmelia Hilton Perth CONSUMER V CORPORATION: COMMERCIAL CONTRACT LITIGATION Geoffrey R Hancy B.Juris (Hons), LLB
More informationTHE AUSTRALIAN NATIONAL UNIVERSITY
THE AUSTRALIAN NATIONAL UNIVERSITY ANU COLLEGE OF LAW Social Science Research Network Legal Scholarship Network ANU College of Law Research Paper No. 09-30 Thomas Alured Faunce and Esme Shirlow Australian
More informationFAULT ELEMENTS, STRICT LIABILITY AND ABSOLUTE LIABILITY. Generally involves an actus reus (guilty act) and mens rea (guilty mind).
FAULT ELEMENTS, STRICT LIABILITY AND ABSOLUTE LIABILITY CRIME A wrong punishable by the State. Generally involves an actus reus (guilty act) and mens rea (guilty mind). Description of a prohibited behaviour
More informationHarriton v Stephens. An action for wrongful life ; an opportunity for teaching the law in context. Meredith Blake UWA Law School
Harriton v Stephens An action for wrongful life ; an opportunity for teaching the law in context Meredith Blake UWA Law School What is this about? An ethical question? A political question? A religious
More informationCalifornia Bar Examination
California Bar Examination Essay Question: Torts And Selected Answers The Orahte Group is NOT affiliated with The State Bar of California PRACTICE PACKET p.1 Question Manufacturer designed and manufactured
More informationLAW ENFORCEMENT LIABILITY
LAW ENFORCEMENT LIABILITY Carl Ericson ICRMP Risk Management Legal Counsel State Tort Law Tort occurs when a person s behavior has unfairly caused someone to suffer loss or harm by reason of a personal
More informationCriminal Organisation Control Legislation and Cases
Criminal Organisation Control Legislation and Cases 2008-2013 Contents Background...2 Suggested Reading...2 Legislation and Case law By Year...3 Legislation and Case Law By State...4 Amendments to Crime
More informationNorthern Territory Emergency Service
NORTHERN TERRITORY OF AUSTRALIA DISASTERS ACT As in force at 1 July 2008 TABLE OF PROVISIONS Part I Preliminary 1 Short title...1 2 Commencement...1 3 Repeal...1 4 Definitions...1 5 Application...3 6 Crown
More informationOpen disclosure - an opportunity lost? Dr John Arranga Victorian State Manager, Avant Law Pty Ltd
Open disclosure - an opportunity lost? Dr John Arranga Victorian State Manager, Avant Law Pty Ltd Disclaimer The information in this presentation is general information relating to legal and/or clinical
More informationLaw of Tort (Paper 22, Unit 22) Syllabus - for the June and October 2009 Examinations
Outline of assessment Law of Tort (Paper 22, Unit 22) Syllabus - for the June and October 2009 Examinations Time allowed: 3 hours. Each question carries a total of 25 marks. The examination paper is divided
More informationThe Contractor s building defects liability in England and Wales
The Contractor s building defects liability in England and Wales We discuss in this paper in what circumstances can a contractor be found liable for defects discovered by the building occupier several
More informationError! Bookmark not defined. Error! Bookmark not defined. Error! Bookmark not defined. Error! Bookmark not defined.
Table of Contents PART 1: INTRODUCTION... 5 Introduction to the Law of Torts (CHAPTER 1):... 5 The nature of torts law:... 5 Definition of a tort:... 5 Remedies:... 5 Torts reforms:... 6 Scope of the reforms:...
More informationCustomer will bring an action against Businessman under a negligence theory.
Customer (C) v. Businessman (B) Customer will bring an action against Businessman under a negligence theory. Negligence requires a Breach of a Duty that Causes Damages. A. Duty B had a duty to drive as
More informationSection 3: The Law of Torts. Nature of Tort
P05 Insurance Law Section 3: The Law of Torts Nature of Tort Question 1: What is a tort? Question 2: Note at least 3 examples of torts. Torts and Crimes The same behaviour may result in a crime and a tort.
More informationGriffith University v Tang: Review of University Decisions Made Under an Enactment
Griffith University v Tang: Review of University Decisions Made Under an Enactment MELISSA GANGEMI* 1. Introduction In Griffith University v Tang, 1 the court was presented with the quandary of determining
More informationNATIONAL COMPETITON DRIVERS LICENCE APPLICATION
NATIONAL COMPETITON DRIVERS LICENCE APPLICATION Form23CL Amended Sept 16 Tick one box LICENCE RENEWAL NEW LICENCE APPLICATION NAME: ADDRESS: SUBURB: POST CODE: PHONE: EMAIL APBA AFFILIATED CLUB: STATE
More informationContracts I - Components
Contracts I - Components Index Contracts I - Components... 1 Overview... 4 Terminology in contract law... 4 What is a contract?... 5 Essential elements of a binding contract:... 5 Types of Contracts...
More informationSOCE311. Session 3. Legal Aspects. Department of Social Sciences.
SOCE311 Session 3 Legal Aspects Department of Social Sciences www.endeavour.edu.au Session Aim o The aim of this session is to provide an introduction to: criminal law, civic law, and torts the Therapeutic
More informationFALL 2001 December 15, 2001 FALL SEMESTER SAMPLE ANSWER
TORTS I PROFESSOR DEWOLF FALL 2001 December 15, 2001 FALL SEMESTER SAMPLE ANSWER QUESTION 1 This question is based on Henderson v. Fields, 2001 WL 1529262 (Mo.App. W.D., Dec 04, 2001), in which the court
More information