NEGLIGENCE. Wrongs Act 1958 (Vic) s43 Negligence means failure to exercise reasonable care.

Size: px
Start display at page:

Download "NEGLIGENCE. Wrongs Act 1958 (Vic) s43 Negligence means failure to exercise reasonable care."

Transcription

1 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 which a prudent and reasonable person would not do (action) (NB: careless acts do not always amount to negligence) ELEMENTS IN THE TORT OF NEGLIGENCE: 1. Is there a DOC in the situation? 2. Has there been a BREACH of this DOC 3. Has the breached CAUSED HARM (CAUSATION) which is recognised by the law of tort, and is this harm REASONABLY FORSEEABLE and not too REMOTE (SCOPE OF LIABILITY) 4. Does a DEFENSE apply? Once the above has been established, we can determine; 5. DAMAGES apply. - Use COMMON LAW concept of reasonable person to determine the appropriate standard of care and whether the D is in breach. - Use STATUTORY FRAMEWORK to advise on whether there has been a breach of the appropriate standard of care in a hypothetical problem. At the outset, consider the following questions; What is the NATURE OF HARM alleged? Physical, mental, pure economic loss? What is the CONDUCT that is alleged to be negligent? Positive action or omission? Does it involve a duty to control a THIRD PARTY? Generally an omission. Does this involve PUBLIC AUTHORITIES? Contentions if an omission. Or a third party? Is this about joint illegality? Advocates immunity?

2 ELEMENT 1. DUTY OF CARE Heaven v Pender (1833) QBD Duty of care- SHIP PAINTER D owned a dock and had a contract with a ship owner. D erected scaffolding outside the ship so it could be painted. The ship owner had a contract with a ship painting company, who employed the PL (painting contractor) to paint the ship. A scaffolding rope broke, and PL fell and was injured. Held: There was no contract between the PL and the D, BUT The PL was an invitee on the D s dock, and the D derived a benefit fro him being there, therefore a special relationship existed between him and the D, with a duty to exercise some care for safety. DOC existed and was owed by the doc owner. Dissenting; Brett MR Looked for a wider scope of liability Whenever one person is placed in a position with regard to another that every one of ordinary sense who did think would at once recognise that if he did not use ordinary care and skill he would cause danger of injury to the person or property of another, a duty arises to use ordinary care and skill to avoid such danger. This was later adopted in Donoghue v Stevenson. Donoghue v Stevenson - SNAIL IN BOTTLE Found snail in a bottle of ginger beer, served to her at a café, but purchased by She got sick and sued the manufacture of ginger beer, although no contract A contract existed between her friend and the café, and the café and the D claimed that the manufacture breached a DOC owed to her as consumer, and ISSUE: in the absence of contractual relations, would the English law recognise a GENERAL duty to avoid causing harm to others by carelessness? Majority Held; DOC owed GENERAL duty to avoid causing harm to others by carelessness Look at PROXIMITY between PL and D (closeness of relationship) A reasonable manufacture would be aware of a class of persons (consumer) who would be affected by their careless conduct. Appeals to public sentiment and morality. 3:2 majority - not necessary there be a direct contractual connection This ruling was incorporated into Australian law in Australian Knitting Mills case. Lord Atkin You must take reasonable care to avoid acts or omissions which you can reasonably foresee would be likely to injure your neighbour. Who, then, in law is my neighbour? Persons who are so closely and directly affected by my act that I ought reasonably to have them in contemplation as being so affected when I am directing my mind to the acts or omissions which are called in question. DOC step 1- neighbourhood principle. Australian Knitting Mills It is not necessary that there be a direct contractual relationship (to establish DOC)

3 ESTABLISHING A DOC There are three situations; 1. Law has established DOC (e.g. doctor patient, drivers on the road, manufacture and consumer) 2. Law has established NO DOC (e.g. barrister, police, child protection agencies, omissions) 3. NOVEL SCENARIOS - No settled law on whether a DOC does/doesn t exist. - Was it REASONABLY FORSEEABLE that the PL could be injured by D s action/omission (introduced by Donoghue v Stevenson) - Are there sufficient SALIENT FEATURES of a duty relationship to find a duty exists here? (More recent- introduced in Sullivan v Moody) S.45 of the Wrongs Act; make sure another act doesn t exclude the type of case you re dealing with. [Fire, police, SES, Transport, workplace, juries, teaching, tobacco-related injury are regulated by their own legislation. Can t sue in negligence] NOVEL SCENARIOS - UNESTABLISHED DOC Reasonable foreseeability - is the general harm to the class of persons reasonable foreseeable? - To establish DOC, it must be demonstrated that; - A reasonable person in D s position would have seen the risk of harm to the PL, or class of person to whom the PL belongs Sullivan v Moody. What kind of harm? General kind - Only need to foresee that careless conduct OF ANY KIND will result in SOME KIND of harm to the PL (San Sebastian) - Precise sequence of events need not be foreseeable (Chapman) How probable must harm be? Not unlikely - Harm NOT UNLIKELY to occur Caterson - A foreseeable risk is one that is not far-fetched or fanciful Wyong Does the exact harm need to be foreseeable? - No - Foreseeability in a GENERAL WAY is sufficient Chapman - Is there a reasonably FORESEEABLE CLASS OF PEOPLE that could suffer from some kind of harm from the D s carelessness? (Chapman) - Necessary to determine whether a consequence of the same general kind was reasonably foreseeable as a consequence not unlikely to follow - It must be reasonably foreseeable that harm [of the same general kind] was not unlikely to occur to [GENERAL CLASS person of which the PL was one] CHAPMAN v HEARSE - REASONABLE FORSEEABILITY sequence of events Facts; Chapman caused a car crash, and he became injured (unconscious) on the side of the road. Dr Cherry stopped to help and was subsequently hit by another car and killed. The car was being driven negligently by Hearse. Hears says Chapman is partially responsible for Cherry s death b/c of his negligent driving which caused the initial accident. Chapman claimed that he could not reasonably foresee the sequence of events that led to Cherry s death, and therefore no DOC. Issue; did chapman owe his rescuer a DOC? (I.e. scope of reasonable foreseeability) Held; RF at DUTY stage; - Was it RF that the injuries to a PARTICULAR CLASS OF PERSON would have occurred? - Foreseeability in a GENERAL WAY is sufficient (not specific) - Where a PL is injured as the result of a sequence of events, it is sufficient to ask whether a consequence of the same general kind was reasonably foreseeable as one not unlikely to follow a collision between two vehicles on a dark wet night on a busy highway. - It is not necessary for the PL to show that the precise manner was reasonably foreseeable; it is sufficient if it appears that injury to a class of persons of might be a RF consequence.

4 - APPLICATION - Is it reasonably foreseeable that reckless driving would cause PERSONAL INJURY (that is the class of injury) to other ROAD USERS (class of persons) Caterson v Commissioner for Railways When is something RF? When it is NOT UNLIKELY to occur Issue: Was the railway negligent in not foreseeing that a passenger may jump from a moving train if it left before they could disembark? Held, NOT UNLIKELY to occur REASONABLE FORSEEABILITY of damage to PL; Need to consider: 1. What class of persons might possibly be put at some risk of injury in some way if the defendant failed in some way to take reasonable care? 2. Is the plaintiff one of those people? 3. When is something reasonably foreseeable 4. What is the general class of injury? (i.e. personal injury, property damage, mental harm or pure economic loss) Introduction of SALIENT FEATURES step in determining a DOC - Reasonably foreseeable step (first step) is very easy to satisfy - Therefore it is necessary, but not sufficient to establish duty of care where there is no settled law (precedent) - That is why there is a second step, the SALIENT FEATURES STEP. - DOC depends on finding a sufficient number of factors (salient features) indicating why it is proper to impose DOC in a particular case. - NB: In AUS, personal injury or property damage case is guaranteed DOC. (presumption you will get it) - HC clarified step 2 in Sullivan v Moody A D will only be liable in circumstances where the law imposes a duty of care. - Second step: analysis of salient features Sullivan v Moody - HISTORIC ORIGIN OF SALIENT FEATURES APPROACH D will only be liable in circumstance where the law imposes a DOC. Reasonable foreseeability is relevant but not sufficient, courts must look at other relevant factors, which later came to be known as salient features approach. Exam answer- Sullivan's case said the law wants to balance individuals rights - Sexual assault investigation was done negligently and father was falsely accused of sexually assaulting his child, claimed it caused him great harm. - Did the CPS agent have a DOC to the person he was investigating? - Here, the HCA had to try to balance everyone's rights they didn t want to restrict people too much or constrain freedom, and therefore, although the harm was reasonably foreseeable, the courts established a second step, and a DOC was not found. Step 1: Reasonable foreseeability: - It was reasonably foreseeable that a doctor/social worker who was not careful in running an investigation would cause harm to the person they were investigating. Step 2: Salient features focused on in Sullivan v Moody: - Conflict of law: is there a better-suited area of law under which the P s action should be brought? (E.g. defamation) - Coherency of law/inconsistent or conflicting duties: the finding of a duty in this instance would conflict with an already existing duty or legal obligation? (Yes, it would conflict with CPS STATUTORY duty to investigate. Quote below.) - Indeterminate liability: exposure D to indeterminate liability (they would owe a duty to every suspect of child abuse) - Floodgates: would finding a duty of care here risk flooding the courts with claims of liability?

5 Held, no DOC because; - The law would subject citizens to an intolerable burden of potential liability, and constrain their freedom of action in a gross manner. - Secondly, the tort of negligence would weaken many other principles of law, and statutory provisions, which strike a balance of rights and obligations, duties and freedoms. - A D will only be liable, in negligence, for failure to take reasonable care to prevent a certain kind of foreseeable harm to a plaintiff, in circumstances where the law imposes a duty to take such care - Just because the D owes a DOC to a third party (i.e. the child), or is subject to statutory obligations which constrain them, does not of itself rule out the possibility that a duty of care is owed to a plaintiff. People may be subject to a number of duties. But if a suggested DOC would give rise to inconsistent obligations, that would ordinarily be a reason for denying that the duty exists. RE: coherency of law. CAL no 14 v Motor Accidents Insurance Board (2005) SALIENT FEATURES APPROACH - Proprietor or licensee of a hotel owes no DOC to protect customers from the consequences of the alcohol they choose to consume. Mr Scott was drinking at a pub, and locked his motorbike in the pub storeroom, and handed his keys over to the licensee (knowing a booze bus was nearby) Mrs Scott was going to collect her husband from the hotel later in the evening 8:15pm, the Licensee told Mr Scott that he had consumed enough alcohol and asked for Mrs Scott s telephone number. Mr Scott refused, using confrontational and offensive language. Mr Scott then asked the Licensee for the motorcycle and its keys, after stating three times that he was Ok to drive. Witnesses at the hotel said that they did not notice any signs of intoxication. In the course of a 7KM journey, Mr Scott was killed 700 metres from home Alcohol was a cause of the accident MAIB was suing the pub to recover sums it had paid to Mrs Scott as the result of her husband s death. Issue: Did the Licensee owe a duty of care to Mr Scott to refuse to hand over the keys, and to call his wife? NB: this would be in addition to the other publican duties (to keep him safe on site) If he refused to hand over keys he could be labile for property theft, false imprisonment. Held: A proprietor or licensee of a hotel owes no common law DOC to customers to monitor or minimise the service of alcohol, or to protect customers from the consequences of the alcohol they choose to consume. Not discussed; whether there is a common law DOC owed to a third party who suffers damage as the result of the intoxication of a customer Step 1: Reasonable foreseeability: - It is reasonably foreseeable that a patron might be injured, if a licensee is negligent in preventing them from driving home while intoxicated. Step 2: Salient features: Was the PL vulnerable?! He was aggressive, not vulnerable. He chose to take the risk. Was the D in control! The defendant (pub) was NOT in control of the activity that created risk! There was an informal arrangement to look after the keys/motorcycle but the pub had no authority to keep the keys (couldn't t refuse to hand them back)! The PL is in control- how is a pub going to monitor his condition? He is a grownup. Compare to lifeguard situation.

6 ! Would have been different if the PL has said he was relying on the pub (Pub then takes on the assumption of responsibility and D takes less care) Was there a pre-existing relationship (yes- more likely to find duty of care) o Publican and patron- not as strong as doctor/patient but still relevent Were there any reasonable steps the PL could have taken to protect himself (but chose not to)? o He could have drunk less, called his wife, could have walked home, could have not driven his motorbike there. o IF there were no reasonable steps AND PL was vulnerable then a DOC would be owed Conflict of law o Finding a DOC here would put the D in an impossible position o If pub kept keys they would be breaching other areas of law They also noted TAS legislation required pubs to expel drunk patrons- if they ruled here that pub owed a DOC to keep him, it would conflict with this statute. Aseels Palace v Moubarak SALIENT FEATURES APPROACH licenced premise have duty to control patrons and prevent injury from violent behaviour A patron shot and killed 2 PL s on NYE in a restaurant PL s sued the restaurant for their injuries PL s alleged that the restaurant owed them a DOC to provide sufficient security during the function, and control who entered the premise. D argued that they cannot be responsible for the criminal acts of third parties Issue: Does a restaurant owe a DOC to patrons that are assaulted in the restaurant? Step 1: Reasonable foreseeability: It is reasonably foreseeable that if you are negligent in controlling violent patrons, another patron might be injured. Step 2: Salient features: Control what was the degree of the D s (restaurant s) control over the activity that gave rise to the risk? Consistency of law/duties- finding a DOC her is consistent with other Statutory responsibilities (liquor licencing laws) Held Licenced premise have a duty to prevent violent, quarrelsome or disorderly conduct of patrons therefore they also have a CL duty to take care (reasonable steps) to control patrons and prevent injury from such behaviour. When determining salient features, look at: - Features relevant in past cases (relevant established salient features) - Anything else salient in the present case. - Strong emphasis on reasoning by analogy and emphasis on the type of scenario you are faced with. - Features must sufficiently general in character, no personal discretion - Not all salient features are accorded equal weight How to use salient features approach: Novel scenarios (no established duty); salient features determines the existence of a duty Established duty scenarios; salient features defines scope of DOC, and whether D s conduct falls within this scope. NB: salient features can deny existence of a duty even if harm is reasonably foreseeable.

7 Kirby J on Salient features in Harriton v Stephens! 3 salient features were identified in Sullivan v Moody that often point against the existence of a duty.! Finding a DOC would; 1. Cut across or undermine other legal rules; 2. Be incompatible with another duty; 3. Expose the defendant to indeterminate liability (don t want to impose liability for an indeterminate amount, for an indeterminate time, to an indeterminate class)! Other factors capable of supporting a DOC have been identified 1. Vulnerability on the part of the plaintiff; 2. Special control; or 3. D s knowledge/awareness of risk or likelihood of harm to PL. Salient features established in various other cases; " Pl s Vulnerability/ inability to protect self from harm (e.g. CAL; Perre; Tame) " D s knowledge/awareness of risk or likelihood of harm to PL Relationship between the parties Proximity in the sense of physical closeness (Sulivan v Moody) X Indeterminate liability " D s control over situation (Perre)

3003 Negligence Law Final Exam Notes Griffith University

3003 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 information

Vicarious Liability: imposed in certain relationships eg. Employee/ Employer

Vicarious 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 information

False 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 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 information

Two elements:! 1. Employer/employee relationship! 2. The tortious conduct took place during the course of the employment.!

Two 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 information

TORTS SUMMARY LAWSKOOL PTY LTD

TORTS 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 information

DUTY OF CARE. The plaintiff must firstly establish that the defendant owed hum a duty of care: this arises where:

DUTY 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 information

Chapter 2: Negligence: The Duty of Care General Principles and Public Policy

Chapter 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 information

TORTS SPECIFIC TORTS NEGLIGENCE

TORTS 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 information

Torts: Exam Notes LAW5003 Trimester 1, 2016

Torts: 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 information

Negligence Case Law and Notes

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 information

Negligence: Approaching the duty of care

Negligence: 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 information

Sample. Aims of this Chapter. 2.1 Introduction. Outline

Sample. 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 information

LAWS1100 Final Exam Notes

LAWS1100 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 information

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

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 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 information

Coming to a person s aid when off duty

Coming 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 information

Australian Legal History Essay Competition THE FOURTH ANNUAL (2010) COMPETITION: A GENERAL OUTLINE

Australian Legal History Essay Competition THE FOURTH ANNUAL (2010) COMPETITION: A GENERAL OUTLINE THE FRANCIS FORBES SOCIETY FOR AUSTRALIAN LEGAL HISTORY ABN 55 099 158 620 Australian Legal History Essay Competition THE FOURTH ANNUAL (2010) COMPETITION: A GENERAL OUTLINE 1. COMPETITION RULES: The rules

More information

HURT PROVING CAUSATION IN CHRONIC PAIN CASES

HURT 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 information

BTEC & A Level Law Topic Exploration Pack

BTEC & A Level Law Topic Exploration Pack BTEC & A Level Law Topic Exploration Pack AIntroduction - L E V E L &tobthe T ENature C L A of W Law #THIS I S TH E P L AC E Welcome A Level SU M MtoEBTEC R and TA S KLaw Please work through this topic

More information

Professor 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 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 information

Question 1. On what theory or theories might damages be recovered, and what defenses might reasonably be raised in actions by:

Question 1. On what theory or theories might damages be recovered, and what defenses might reasonably be raised in actions by: Question 1 A state statute requires motorcyclists to wear a safety helmet while riding, and is enforced by means of citations and fines. Having mislaid his helmet, Adam jumped on his motorcycle without

More information

Fall 1995 December 15, 1995 SAMPLE ANSWER TO MID-TERM EXAM QUESTION 1

Fall 1995 December 15, 1995 SAMPLE ANSWER TO MID-TERM EXAM QUESTION 1 Professor DeWolf Torts I Fall 1995 December 15, 1995 SAMPLE ANSWER TO MID-TERM EXAM QUESTION 1 The facts for Question 1 are taken from Stewart v. Ryan, 520 N.W.2d 39 (N.D. 1994), in which the court reversed

More information

The section Causation: Actual Cause and Proximate Cause from Business Law and the Legal Environment was adapted by The Saylor Foundation under a

The section Causation: Actual Cause and Proximate Cause from Business Law and the Legal Environment was adapted by The Saylor Foundation under a The section Causation: Actual Cause and Proximate Cause from Business Law and the Legal Environment was adapted by The Saylor Foundation under a Creative Commons Attribution- NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0

More information

Torts, Professional Liability and Expert Evidence. Craig Wallace, P.Eng. CE 402

Torts, Professional Liability and Expert Evidence. Craig Wallace, P.Eng. CE 402 Torts, Professional Liability and Expert Evidence Craig Wallace, P.Eng. CE 402 Essentials of Tort Law Tort Law Origins Historically dealt with "duty" owed to everyone you haven't agreed with in advance

More information

Torts I review session November 20, 2017 SLIDES. Negligence

Torts I review session November 20, 2017 SLIDES. Negligence Torts I review session November 20, 2017 SLIDES Negligence 1 Negligence Duty of care owed to plaintiff Breach of duty Actual causation Proximate causation Damages Negligence Duty of care owed to plaintiff

More information

LEGAL STUDIES. Unit 2 Written Examination Trial Examination SOLUTIONS

LEGAL STUDIES. Unit 2 Written Examination Trial Examination SOLUTIONS LEGAL STUDIES Unit 2 Written Examination 2015 Trial Examination SOLUTIONS SECTION A: (25 marks) Question 1 a. Precedent Also known as stare decisis which is to stand by what has been previously decided.

More information

Legal Liability in Adventure Tourism

Legal 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 information

Chapter 6 Torts Byron Lilly De Anza College Byron Lilly De Anza College

Chapter 6 Torts Byron Lilly De Anza College Byron Lilly De Anza College Chapter 6 Torts 1 Common Torts Defamation = Libel and Slander Negligence False imprisonment Battery, Assault, Fraud Interference with a contract Commercial exploitation of another s identity or likeness

More information

THE LAW PROFESSOR TORT LAW ESSAY SERIES ESSAY QUESTION #3 MODEL ANSWER

THE LAW PROFESSOR TORT LAW ESSAY SERIES ESSAY QUESTION #3 MODEL ANSWER THE LAW PROFESSOR TORT LAW ESSAY SERIES ESSAY QUESTION #3 MODEL ANSWER Carol stopped her car at the entrance to her office building to get some papers from her office. She left her car unlocked and left

More information

Civil Liability Amendment (Personal Responsibility) Act 2002 No 92

Civil 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 information

Customer will bring an action against Businessman under a negligence theory.

Customer 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 information

a) test the strength of the opposing positions and encourage the parties to reach a compromise b) ensure that all documents are in order before trial

a) test the strength of the opposing positions and encourage the parties to reach a compromise b) ensure that all documents are in order before trial Question 1 The purpose of discovery is to a) test the strength of the opposing positions and encourage the parties to reach a compromise b) ensure that all documents are in order before trial c) ensure

More information

MARK SCHEME for the May/June 2011 question paper for the guidance of teachers 9084 LAW. 9084/43 Paper 4, maximum raw mark 75

MARK 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 information

KY DRAM SHOP MEMO II

KY DRAM SHOP MEMO II I. Kentucky s Dram Shop Act KY DRAM SHOP MEMO II KRS 413.241 Legislative finding; limitation on liability of licensed sellers or servers of intoxicating beverages; liability of intoxicated person (1) The

More information

Fall 1997 December 20, 1997 SAMPLE ANSWER TO MID-TERM EXAM QUESTION 1

Fall 1997 December 20, 1997 SAMPLE ANSWER TO MID-TERM EXAM QUESTION 1 Professor DeWolf Torts I Fall 1997 December 20, 1997 SAMPLE ANSWER TO MID-TERM EXAM QUESTION 1 This case is based upon McLeod v. Cannon Oil Corp., 603 So.2d 889 (Ala. 1992). In that case the court reversed

More information

IN THE SECOND JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF WASHOE * * * *

IN THE SECOND JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF WASHOE * * * * IN THE SECOND JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF WASHOE * * * * JANE HEALY, Plaintiff, CASE NO.: CR09-100 vs. DEPT. NO.: 1 CHARLES RAYMOND, an individual, ALLEGRETTI

More information

ANSWER A TO ESSAY QUESTION 5

ANSWER 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 information

LAWS1203 Torts 1 st Semester 2007

LAWS1203 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 information

Washoe Tribe of Nevada and California. Law & Order Code TITLE 3 TORTS. [Last Amended 10/1/04. Current Through 2/3/09.]

Washoe Tribe of Nevada and California. Law & Order Code TITLE 3 TORTS. [Last Amended 10/1/04. Current Through 2/3/09.] Washoe Tribe of Nevada and California Law & Order Code TITLE 3 TORTS [Last Amended 10/1/04. Current Through 2/3/09.] 3-10 DEFINITIONS The following words have the meanings given below when used in this

More information

MBE WORKSHOP: TORTS PROFESSOR LISA MCELROY DREXEL UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF LAW

MBE WORKSHOP: TORTS PROFESSOR LISA MCELROY DREXEL UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF LAW CHAPTER 1: TORTS MBE WORKSHOP: TORTS PROFESSOR LISA MCELROY DREXEL UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF LAW Editor's Note 1: The below outline is taken from the National Conference of Bar Examiners' website. NOTE: The

More information

It s a fair cop: Supreme Court reviews duty of care

It s a fair cop: Supreme Court reviews duty of care It s a fair cop: Supreme Court reviews duty of care Patrick West, Barrister, St John s Chambers Published on 14 February 2018 (And a foot note on the Worboys Case) Robinson v Chief Constable of West Yorkshire

More information

Negligence 1. Duty of Care 2. Breach of duty of care p 718 c) p 724

Negligence 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 information

Anglo-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) 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 information

FALL 2003 December 11, 2003 FALL EXAM SAMPLE ANSWER

FALL 2003 December 11, 2003 FALL EXAM SAMPLE ANSWER TORTS I PROFESSOR DEWOLF FALL 2003 December 11, 2003 FALL EXAM SAMPLE ANSWER QUESTION 1 The facts for this question were based upon Brown v. Michigan Bell Telephone, Inc., 225 Mich.App. 617, 572 N.W.2d

More information

NEGLIGENCE. All four of the following must be demonstrated for a legal claim of negligence to be successful:

NEGLIGENCE. All four of the following must be demonstrated for a legal claim of negligence to be successful: NEGLIGENCE WHAT IS NEGLIGENCE? Negligence is unintentional harm to others as a result of an unsatisfactory degree of care. It occurs when a person NEGLECTS to do something that a reasonably prudent person

More information

AC : ENGINEERING MALPRACTICE: AVOIDING LIABILITY THROUGH EDUCATION

AC : ENGINEERING MALPRACTICE: AVOIDING LIABILITY THROUGH EDUCATION AC 2007-1436: ENGINEERING MALPRACTICE: AVOIDING LIABILITY THROUGH EDUCATION Martin High, Oklahoma State University Marty founded and co-directs the Legal Studies in Engineering Program at Oklahoma State

More information

IN THE SECOND JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF WASHOE. Plaintiff v. Defendant TRIAL BRIEF OF PLAINTIFF

IN THE SECOND JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF WASHOE. Plaintiff v. Defendant TRIAL BRIEF OF PLAINTIFF 1 1 1 CASE NO. ========================================================== IN THE SECOND JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF WASHOE ==========================================================

More information

When 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 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 information

CALIFORNIA ESSAY WRITING WORKSHOP PROFESSOR CHRISTOPHER IDE-DON UC DAVIS SCHOOL OF LAW

CALIFORNIA ESSAY WRITING WORKSHOP PROFESSOR CHRISTOPHER IDE-DON UC DAVIS SCHOOL OF LAW CALIFORNIA ESSAY WRITING WORKSHOP PROFESSOR CHRISTOPHER IDE-DON UC DAVIS SCHOOL OF LAW CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION A. Bar Exam Basics Editor's Note 1: The Professor refers to specific page numbers throughout

More information

Alcohol Consumption and Harm: A Consideration of Legal Liability Relating to the Service and Promotion of Alcohol

Alcohol Consumption and Harm: A Consideration of Legal Liability Relating to the Service and Promotion of Alcohol The Wine Industry - Volume 12, 2010 Alcohol Consumption and Harm: A Consideration of Legal Liability Relating to the Service and Promotion of Alcohol Anna Bunn and Robert Guthrie School of Business Law

More information

Medical Indemnity Forum 24 th August. Tort Law Reform. Professor Loane Skene

Medical 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 information

v. Record No OPINION BY JUSTICE BARBARA MILANO KEENAN March 3, 2000 MATT MARY MORAN, INC., ET AL.

v. Record No OPINION BY JUSTICE BARBARA MILANO KEENAN March 3, 2000 MATT MARY MORAN, INC., ET AL. Present: Compton, 1 Lacy, Hassell, Keenan, Koontz,and Kinser, JJ., and Poff, Senior Justice TERESA F. ROBINSON, ADMINISTRATOR, ETC. v. Record No. 990778 OPINION BY JUSTICE BARBARA MILANO KEENAN March 3,

More information

Question 1. Under what theory or theories might Paul recover, and what is his likelihood of success, against: a. Charlie? b. KiddieRides-R-Us?

Question 1. Under what theory or theories might Paul recover, and what is his likelihood of success, against: a. Charlie? b. KiddieRides-R-Us? Question 1 Twelve-year-old Charlie was riding on his small, motorized 3-wheeled all terrain vehicle ( ATV ) in his family s large front yard. Suddenly, finding the steering wheel stuck in place, Charlie

More information

For Preview Only - Please Do Not Copy

For Preview Only - Please Do Not Copy Information or instructions: Plaintiff's original petition-auto accident 1. The following form may be used to file a personal injury lawsuit. 2. It assumes several plaintiffs were rear-ended by an employee

More information

matter of fact A Breach of Duty: Identify the Risks

matter 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 information

PRESENT: Hassell, C.J., Lacy, Keenan, Kinser, Lemons, and Agee, JJ., and Compton, S.J.

PRESENT: Hassell, C.J., Lacy, Keenan, Kinser, Lemons, and Agee, JJ., and Compton, S.J. PRESENT: Hassell, C.J., Lacy, Keenan, Kinser, Lemons, and Agee, JJ., and Compton, S.J. ROBERT MICHAEL McMINN OPINION BY SENIOR JUSTICE A. CHRISTIAN COMPTON v. Record No. 030286 January 16, 2004 SCOTT CHRISTOPHER

More information

Understanding the RM Process

Understanding the RM Process Associate in Risk Management ARM 54 -Chapter 4 Understanding the Legal Foundations of Liability Loss Exposures Presented by: Lynne Lovell RHU CLU ChFC CIC CRM ARM CPCU AFSB ASLI AINS MLIS CRIS Understanding

More information

Mitchell 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 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 information

Legal Update BELL ROPER LAW FLORIDA SUPREME COURT PROHIBITS FEE REDUCTION IN CLAIM BILLS

Legal Update BELL ROPER LAW FLORIDA SUPREME COURT PROHIBITS FEE REDUCTION IN CLAIM BILLS Legal Update BELL ROPER LAW J u l y / A u g u s t 2 0 1 7 FLORIDA SUPREME COURT PROHIBITS FEE REDUCTION IN CLAIM BILLS The well-known plaintiff s law firm of Searcy, Denney, Scarola, Barnhart & Shipley,

More information

UNCORRECTED. Negligence and duty of care

UNCORRECTED. Negligence and duty of care CHAPTER 8 TOPIC 3 Negligence and duty of care CHAPTER OBJECTIVES By the end of this chapter, students should be able to: describe key terms using legal terminology, including proximity, causation, foreseeability,

More information

ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE GENERAL ASPECTS OF CRIMINAL LAW. Name: Period: Row:

ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE GENERAL ASPECTS OF CRIMINAL LAW. Name: Period: Row: ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE GENERAL ASPECTS OF CRIMINAL LAW Name: Period: Row: I. INTRODUCTION TO CRIMINAL LAW A. Understanding the complexities of criminal law 1. The justice system in the United States

More information

REMOTENESS OF DAMAGES

REMOTENESS 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 information

STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS

STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee, UNPUBLISHED May 8, 2012 v No. 304225 Ingham Circuit Court PERCY MONTE HARRISON, LC No. 09-00148-FH Defendant-Appellant.

More information

CONDENSED OUTLINE FOR TORTS I

CONDENSED OUTLINE FOR TORTS I Condensed Outline of Torts I (DeWolf), November 25, 2003 1 CONDENSED OUTLINE FOR TORTS I [Use this only as a supplement and corrective for your own more detailed outlines!] The classic definition of a

More information

Answer A to Question 4

Answer A to Question 4 Question 4 A residence hall on the campus of University was evacuated after a number of student residents became seriously ill from aerial dispersal of bacteria that had infested the air conditioning system.

More information

LWB147 Week 11 Lecture Notes Defences to Negligence

LWB147 Week 11 Lecture Notes Defences to Negligence LWB147 Week 11 Lecture Notes Defences to Negligence Negligence Plaintiffs must prove on the balance of probabilities: Duty of care Breach of that duty Damage Defendants must prove on the balance of probabilities:

More information

Negligence: Elements

Negligence: Elements Negligence: Elements 1) Duty: The defendant must owe a duty to the plaintiff to avoid causing the harm that was eventually caused. 2) Breach: The defendant must have breached this duty by acting unreasonably

More information

THE AUSTRALIAN NATIONAL UNIVERSITY

THE 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 information

Gun Laws Under The Influence. nonsense. The session of the California legislature just ended has once again

Gun Laws Under The Influence. nonsense. The session of the California legislature just ended has once again Back to http://www.claytoncramer.com/popularmagazines.htm Gun Laws Under The Influence For the last two decades, California has been on the cutting edge of gun control nonsense. The session of the California

More information

TORT 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 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

Case 1:14-cv Document 10 Filed in TXSD on 09/25/14 Page 1 of 11

Case 1:14-cv Document 10 Filed in TXSD on 09/25/14 Page 1 of 11 Case 1:14-cv-00133 Document 10 Filed in TXSD on 09/25/14 Page 1 of 11 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS BROWNSVILLE DIVISION DIGNA O. QUEZADA CUEVAS, Plaintiff, v.

More information

CASE NO. COMPLAINT AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL. The Plaintiff, CHARLESETTA WALKER, as CONSERVATOR FOR THE PERSON,

CASE NO. COMPLAINT AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL. The Plaintiff, CHARLESETTA WALKER, as CONSERVATOR FOR THE PERSON, Electronically Filed 06/28/2013 01:01:15 PM ET IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE 9 TH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR ORANGE COUNTY, FLORIDA CIVIL CIRCUIT JURISDICTION CASE NO. CHARLESETTA WALKER, as CONSERVATOR

More information

To begin, the behaviour and the defendant in question have to be identified as well as the offence they ve committed. This may be:

To begin, the behaviour and the defendant in question have to be identified as well as the offence they ve committed. This may be: Homicide Offences To begin, the behaviour and the defendant in question have to be identified as well as the offence they ve committed. This may be: Murder or voluntary manslaughter if partial defences

More information

Comparative Private Law. Dr. Anna Plisecka Tort law Systems in Europe

Comparative Private Law. Dr. Anna Plisecka Tort law Systems in Europe Comparative Private Law Dr. Anna Plisecka Tort law Systems in Europe I. Introduction to Tort Law II. Concepts of Wrongfulness, especially liability of children (case study) 07.12.2015 Dr. Anna Plisecka

More information

J U D G M E N T CRIMINAL APPEAL NO OF 2007 (Arising out of S.L.P (Crl.) No.4805 of 2006) Dr. ARIJIT PASAYAT, J.

J U D G M E N T CRIMINAL APPEAL NO OF 2007 (Arising out of S.L.P (Crl.) No.4805 of 2006) Dr. ARIJIT PASAYAT, J. Supreme Court of India Naresh Giri vs State Of M.P on 12 November, 2007 Author:. A Pasayat Bench: Dr. Arijit Pasayat, P. Sathasivam CASE NO.: Appeal (crl.) 1530 of 2007 PETITIONER: Naresh Giri RESPONDENT:

More information

Client Update June 2008

Client 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 information

IT S THE MOST WONDERFUL TIME OF THE YEAR EXAMINING SOCIAL HOST LIABILITY IN ONTARIO

IT S THE MOST WONDERFUL TIME OF THE YEAR EXAMINING SOCIAL HOST LIABILITY IN ONTARIO IT S THE MOST WONDERFUL TIME OF THE YEAR EXAMINING SOCIAL HOST LIABILITY IN ONTARIO In a scenario that is unfortunately, not uncommon, a person hosts a party for friends, family members or co-workers.

More information

FALL 2001 December 15, 2001 FALL SEMESTER SAMPLE ANSWER

FALL 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

No IN THE SUPREME COURT OF ILLINOIS Term, A.D. 2003

No IN THE SUPREME COURT OF ILLINOIS Term, A.D. 2003 No. 96210 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF ILLINOIS Term, A.D. 2003 PATRICIA ABRAMS, individually, ) Petition for Leave to Appeal from the and as Special Administrator of ) First District Appellate Court of Illinois,

More information

Carpal Tunnel Syndrome Research Total $ Verdict Case Type Subcategory Facts

Carpal Tunnel Syndrome Research Total $ Verdict Case Type Subcategory Facts Carpal Tunnel Syndrome Research Total Verdict Case Type Subcategory Facts 6,233.00 Plaintiff Premises Liability Restaurant Accident Plaintiff claimed bilateral carpal tunnel due to electric shock from

More information

ROY L. REARDON AND MARY ELIZABETH MCGARRY * SIMPSON THACHER & BARTLETT LLP

ROY L. REARDON AND MARY ELIZABETH MCGARRY * SIMPSON THACHER & BARTLETT LLP NEW YORK COURT OF APPEALS ROUNDUP: COMPELLED PRODUCTION OF HIPPA-COMPLIANT AUTHORIZATIONS, ABSENCE OF TORT DUTY, AND DISORDERLY CONDUCT ROY L. REARDON AND MARY ELIZABETH MCGARRY * SIMPSON THACHER & BARTLETT

More information

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF KING

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF KING IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF KING 0 0 MADHURI R. DEVARA and SUNIL KUMAR SAVARAM, individually and the marital community composed thereof, vs. Plaintiffs, MV

More information

Alcohol Beverage Liability: Legal Update and Best Practices

Alcohol Beverage Liability: Legal Update and Best Practices Alcohol Beverage Liability: Legal Update and Best Practices 2017 Hospitality Law Conference April 24, 2017 Houston, Texas Elizabeth A. DeConti, Esq. GrayRobinson, P.A. 401 East Jackson Street, Suite 2700

More information

Civil Liability Act 2002

Civil 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 information

Torts Rose Vassel 2012 TORTS LAWS1061. Rose VASSEL

Torts Rose Vassel 2012 TORTS LAWS1061. Rose VASSEL TORTS LAWS1061 Rose VASSEL 1 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.

More information

CED: An Overview of the Law

CED: An Overview of the Law Torts BY: Edwin Durbin, B.Comm., LL.B., LL.M. of the Ontario Bar Part II Principles of Liability Click HERE to access the CED and the Canadian Abridgment titles for this excerpt on Westlaw Canada II.1.(a):

More information

TABLE OF CONTENTS 2.1 GENERAL RIGHT OF ACTION UNDER C.R.S LIMITED RIGHT OF ACTION UNDER C.R.S

TABLE OF CONTENTS 2.1 GENERAL RIGHT OF ACTION UNDER C.R.S LIMITED RIGHT OF ACTION UNDER C.R.S TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter 1 OVERVIEW OF WRONGFUL DEATH LAW IN COLORADO........................................... 1 Chapter 2 COLORADO S WRONGFUL DEATH ACT................... 3 2.1 GENERAL RIGHT OF ACTION

More information

DECEMBER 2016 LAW REVIEW FATEFUL DIVE INTO "CLOSED" PARK POND POOL

DECEMBER 2016 LAW REVIEW FATEFUL DIVE INTO CLOSED PARK POND POOL FATEFUL DIVE INTO "CLOSED" PARK POND POOL James C. Kozlowski, J.D., Ph.D. 2016 James C. Kozlowski There is generally no negligence liability for injuries resulting from conditions which should have been

More information

Strict Liability and Product Liability PRODUCT LIABILITY WARRANTY LAW

Strict Liability and Product Liability PRODUCT LIABILITY WARRANTY LAW Strict Liability and Product Liability PRODUCT LIABILITY The legal liability of manufacturers, sellers, and lessors of goods to consumers, users and bystanders for physical harm or injuries or property

More information

Introduction to Criminal Law

Introduction to Criminal Law Introduction to Criminal Law CHAPTER CONTENTS Introduction 2 Crimes versus Civil Wrongs 2 Types of Criminal Offences 3 General Principles of Criminal Law 4 Accessories and Parties to Crimes 5 Attempted

More information

1. Duty, Breach, and the Meaning of Negligence

1. Duty, Breach, and the Meaning of Negligence Law 580: Torts Section 1 September 17, 2015 Assignment for September 15, 16, 17: Casebook pages 97-137, 141-162 Chapter 3: the Breach Element 1. Duty, Breach, and the Meaning of Negligence Myers v. Heritage

More information

Contract and Tort Law for Engineers

Contract 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 information

Assessing 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 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 information

Trial And Appeals In Consolidated Cases: Civil Practice After Kincy v. Petro

Trial And Appeals In Consolidated Cases: Civil Practice After Kincy v. Petro Trial And Appeals In Consolidated Cases: Civil Practice After Kincy v. Petro By JACOB C. LEHMAN,* Philadelphia County Member of the Pennsylvania Bar INTRODUCTION....................... 75 RULE OF CIVIL

More information

Argued September 26, Decided. Before Judges Fuentes and Accurso.

Argued September 26, Decided. Before Judges Fuentes and Accurso. NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION This opinion shall not "constitute precedent or be binding upon any court." Although it is posted on the internet, this opinion is binding

More information

Tort 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 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 information

Contents. 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. 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 information

DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FOURTH DISTRICT July Term 2010

DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FOURTH DISTRICT July Term 2010 DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FOURTH DISTRICT July Term 2010 GERALD CANTALUPO, as Personal Representative of the Estate of Suzanne Marie Cantalupo, Appellant, GERBER, J. v. PAUL J. LEWIS,

More information

Title 28-A: LIQUORS. Chapter 100: MAINE LIQUOR LIABILITY ACT. Table of Contents Part 8. LIQUOR LIABILITY...

Title 28-A: LIQUORS. Chapter 100: MAINE LIQUOR LIABILITY ACT. Table of Contents Part 8. LIQUOR LIABILITY... Title 28-A: LIQUORS Chapter 100: MAINE LIQUOR LIABILITY ACT Table of Contents Part 8. LIQUOR LIABILITY... Section 2501. SHORT TITLE... 3 Section 2502. PURPOSES... 3 Section 2503. DEFINITIONS... 3 Section

More information

DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FOURTH DISTRICT

DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FOURTH DISTRICT DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FOURTH DISTRICT DENISE NICHOLSON, Appellant, v. STONYBROOK APARTMENTS, LLC, d/b/a SUMMIT HOUSING PARTNERS, LLC, Appellee. No. 4D12-4462 [January 7, 2015]

More information

PARK FIREWORKS DISPLAY INJURES BOY WEEKS LATER, OFF SITE

PARK FIREWORKS DISPLAY INJURES BOY WEEKS LATER, OFF SITE PARK FIREWORKS DISPLAY INJURES BOY WEEKS LATER, OFF SITE James C. Kozlowski, J.D., Ph.D. 2005 James C. Kozlowski In the case of Smith v. Fireworks by Girone, Inc., 180 N.J. 199; 850 A.2d 456 (2004), a

More information