Negligence

Negligence

Identify the elements of negligence, viz., for a successful action in negligence,
1. (a) set out the law
Must show Mrs Rich is owed a duty of care by GBA
It must be shown that the defendant GBA owes a duty of care to the claimant Mrs Rich. A duty of care is owed to my neighbour (Donaghue v Stevenson (1932)). Who is my neighbour? The method of determining the existence of a duty of care-the guiding principle as to who is my neighbour is –
. ‘You must take reasonable care to avoid acts or omissions which you can reasonably foresee would be likely to injure your neighbour.
Who is my neighbour? The answer seems to be persons who are so closely and directly affected by my act that I ought reasonably have them in contemplation as being so affected when I am directing my mind to the acts or omissions which are called into question” per Lord Atkin, Donaghue v Stevenson (1932)
Apply the tests in Caparo Industries Plc v Dickman [1990] 2 AC 605 viz., A.was the harm or physical damage reasonably foreseeable and
B. were the claimant and defendant in a relationship of proximity (can the injured party be reasonably contemplated, and
C. where 1 and 2 are satisfied, is it just and reasonable to impose a duty?
1. (b)Read the facts again and explain how the law connects with the facts giving reasons (It is likely Mrs Rich was owed a duty of care by GBA)
2. (a) set out the law- Identify that a breach of the standard of care occurs. It means does the person (behaviour) fall below the standard of care appropriate to the duty he owes. The case which states the principle of law that you have to apply to the facts, regarding when a professional falls below below the standard of care, is stated in Bolam v Friern Hospital Management Committee [1957] 1 WLR 583. The standard of care of care required is that of a competent professional in that particular field. In this case we have a builder. The standard of care is judged according to the standards of a competent body of professional opinion (because the ‘reasonable’ man does not share those skills): So the question is did the builder acted competently. Did he exercise the reasonable skill and care of a competent builder? In other words, would a competent builder have in GBA’s position have acted in the way GBA did;
2(b).Apply the law and consider a whether a there was a breach of that duty. Give your reasons
3. (a)It must be shown that the breach of duty caused injuries physical or to property and that the damage is not too remote- Wagon Mound No. 1 [1961] AC 388. That means that the damage must be reasonably foreseeable at the time of the act or omission.
If it is established that the damage was reas.Forseeable then the next rule is that the person owing a duty of care need only forsee the kind of injuries not the extent of them -Smith v Leech Brain Co. Ltd. [1962] 2 QB 405. Can recover the direct loss arising from the negligent act
3.(b). Apply this and consider the loss that may be recovered giving reasons.
ORDER THIS ESSA HERE NOW AND GET A DISCOUNT !!!

You can place an order similar to this with us. You are assured of an authentic custom paper delivered within the given deadline besides our 24/7 customer support all through.