Study Guides (248,217)
Canada (121,408)
Philosophy (375)

POL- Oct1.doc

2 Pages
Unlock Document

Philosophy 2080
Jeannie Gillmore

Next week: Read Andrews vs. Grand and Toy Under special issues: Matthews vs. Maclaren Is foreseeability enough to establish a case? -Anything is possible, therefore imagining cause and effect is not always realistic -Example: guy gets hit with a cricket ball, sues club for damages. Was this a foreseeable event? Once every three years a ball goes over the fence. Not a busy street. Remote possibility. -When it is probable for an event to occur, then there is a standard of care to be observed. -When it is likely to occur, and there is likely a high severity of the case, then there is a standard. -A test is used to determine likelihood of an event: “The Four Factor Test” 1) Probability 2) Likely severity of injury 3) Cost of avoidance -How much would they have to spend to avoid the injury? 4) Social utility of conduct Case Study -Man blind in one eye was hit with a piece of metal in his “good eye” at work. Sues his employer for not providing safety goggles. In this case, employer was well aware that his employee only had one good eye, so there is a higher standard of care in this case, and it was breached. Causation -Did your negligent act cause harm to the plaintiff? A person must be able to prove that someone’s bad conduct caused the harm to win the case -Something “materially contributed” to means that there is definite causation, and there is more than one cause. -Material increase in risk: not sure of cause, but there is a likelihood to get sick, for example, in that situation -Jointly and severally liable: two or more causes that led to the injury or problem -If you can prove that a material injury or risk occurs from a source, then there is causation Case Study: -Plaintiff got sick with lung disease from two sources. Court found that both sources materially contributed to the injury, so both sources are liable. Case Study: -Man works in a hot, sweaty, dusty environment and develops dermatitis. Man sues National Work- board for not providing a means to get clean after work. Experts on the disease could not identify the cause of dermatitis, therefore could not prove the cause, or “material contribution” Case Study: -Plaintiff, a carpenter, asked two friends to come with him to call his wife in Edmonton. Friends sat in beer parlo
More Less

Related notes for Philosophy 2080

Log In


Join OneClass

Access over 10 million pages of study
documents for 1.3 million courses.

Sign up

Join to view


By registering, I agree to the Terms and Privacy Policies
Already have an account?
Just a few more details

So we can recommend you notes for your school.

Reset Password

Please enter below the email address you registered with and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Add your courses

Get notes from the top students in your class.