Textbook Notes (368,651)
Canada (162,033)
LAW 122 (625)
Chapter 6

Chapter 6 - Negligence (LAW 122)

3 Pages
220 Views
Unlock Document

Department
Law and Business
Course
LAW 122
Professor
Andre Serero
Semester
Summer

Description
- Tort of negligence determines whether the defendant can be held liable for carelessly causing the plaintiff to suffer a loss or injury - Eg; manufacturer may produce a beverage that makes a consumer sick - tort of negligence requires the plaintiff to prove that the defendant - owed a duty of care – required to act carefully toward the plaintiff - breached the standard of care by acting carelessly - caused harm to the plaintiff - defendant may be able to avoid liability by proving a defense. Defendant may show that the plaintiff - was guilty of contributory negligence that caused or contributed to the injury - voluntarily assumed the risk of being injured by the defendant - was injured while engaged in some form of illegal behavior -law of negligence contains a tension between two important values. - on one hand, court wants a wide scope of liability in order to compensate people who suffer injuries. On the other hand the courts recognize that liability sometimes hurts society. Duty of Care - exists if the defendant is required to use reasonable care to avoid injuring the plaintiff -without duty of care there cant be liability Test for Determining the Existence of duty of care -duty of care can be recognized as long as certain conditions are met, courts have developed a unique test for the creation of a duty of care; - judge will first ask whether or not the duty of care question has already been answered -if duty of care question hasn’t been answered for the case, then must ask 3 questions IN ORDER to determine if a duty of care should exist or not. - 3 questions are; - was it reasonably foreseeable that the plaintiff could be injured by the defendants carelessness? -did the parties share a relationship of sufficient proximity? -if an injury was reasonably foreseeable, and if the parties shared a relationship of sufficient proximity, then a duty of care presumably will exist. Judge might still deny a duty of care on the basis of policy reasons. Reasonable Foreseeability - if a reasonable person in the defendants position would have recognized that possibility Proximity -duty of care wont be recognized unless there was also a relationship of proximity - proximity – there must somehow be a close and direct connection between the parties - court will look at the issue of proximity from a variety of perspectives; - whether the parties shared a social relationship – eg;p133 - whether the parties shared a commercial relationship – eg;p133 -whether there was a direct casual connection between the defendants carelessness and the plaintiffs injury – eg;p133 -whether the plaintiff relied on the fact that the defendant represented that it would act in a certain way – eg;p133 Duty of Care for Professional Statements -in the business context, the best example concerns negligent statements -special rules are needed because careless statements are different from careless actions in 3 ways - because the risks associated with statements are often hidden, the need for care is usually less apparent. People tend to speak loosely, especially in social settings. -READ PG. 134 for other 2 reasons - should be very careful about providing information and advice -if you don’t wish to be held liable for your statements, you should cle
More Less

Related notes for LAW 122

Log In


OR

Join OneClass

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

Sign up

Join to view


OR

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.


Submit