LAW OF TORT 2- DEFAMATION Coursework Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1250 words

LAW OF TORT 2- DEFAMATION - Coursework ExampleHere, the jurisprudence of tort, negligence, and transaction of care leave behind be sufficiently explained. II. Law of Tort Tort is the French boy for a wrong. Torts are civil wrongs. Civil wrongs can be contrasted to criminal acts although one action great power result in a potential liability for two claims, one civil and one criminal. If D assaults P, D is liable to be prosecuted for assault and criminal sanctions such as fines, community penalties or chains might be applied by the criminal courts. But P can also treat D in the civil courts for trespass to the person and claim damages for the injury and passing he/she has suffered. Negligence is a tort. III. Negligence, Liability for Negligence, and Defences Against Negligence The shell of Donoghue v- Stephenson (2011), set out the basic principles of negligence in English law (pp. 1). The case concerned food poisoning suffered by Mrs Donoghue whose bottled ginger beer was con taminated with the mud of a decomposed snail. As Mrs Donoghue didnt buy the ginger beer (her friend did) she had no action in ingest law (so she wasnt a party to that contract). The case decided that, in English Law on that point must be and is a general conception of relations giving rise to a duty of care. The liability for negligence is based upon a general public sentiment of wrongdoing for which the offender pays. The case created the concept of negligence as an action in civil law allowing injured parties to sue wrongdoers for their loss and damage. To find a suspect liable for negligence any plaintiff will have to take on the court of the following That the defendant must have owed the plaintiff a duty of care That the defendant through an act or omission breached that duty This breach caused loss to the defendant The loss is not too remote and That the defendant has no relevant defence. From what has been outlined above, the event organiser owes a duty of care to avoid acts or omissions which they might reasonably foresee could injure their neighbour. For an injured party to use up an action for negligence against a defendant they must show that the defendant breached that duty of care. The test of whether or not the duty of care is breached is an objective test what level of care and skill was required by the activity carried out and has the defendant measured up to that level? It is important to realise that where there is an increase probability of harm from activities carried out by the defendant then there will be an change magnitude burden on the defendant to discharge those activities soundly and competently. There will be negligence when the defendant falls below the standard of care required in the circumstances to protect others from the unreasonable happen of harm. Common professional or industry practices and codes of conduct will often be used as a benchmark against which behaviour is tested but they are not in themselves the f inal determiner of negligence or a breach of the duty of care. In practical terms the event organiser needs to ensure that she/he does all things practical and reasonable to ensure that those working at events and aid events are safe. Implementing and conforming to industry guidelines, industry good practice and conforming to relevant legislation and regulations will go a long way to discharge this duty of care and facilitate a safe event.