• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

Law of Tort Assignment.

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

Law of Tort Assignment (i) Since the enactment of the Human Rights Act 1998, it seems that some areas of tort law have been affected by the Act to a great extent. One specific element of tort law that has been affected is 'duty of care in negligence.' The tort of negligence may signify 'whereby persons who by carelessness have caused damage to others and may be held liable to pay compensation.' 1 However, it is not always the case when 'careless conduct which causes damage will give rise to an action.' 2 As this essay will focus on the impact of the Human Rights Act on duty of care in negligence, it is necessary to determine 'whether the type of loss suffered by the claimant in the particular way in which it occurred can ever be actionable,' 3 as this may play a great role in the development of the tort of negligence. Before a duty of care is held to exist, the requirement established in Caparo Industries Plc v Dickman [1990] 1 All ER 568 must be satisfied: (a) 'Foreseeability of the damage; (b) A sufficiently 'proximate' relationship between the parties; and (c) Even where (a) and (b) are satisfied it must be 'just and reasonable' to impose such a duty.' ...read more.

Middle

In this case, 'allegations of negligence were made against the defendants about the treatment of a child after he had been taken into care. The House of lord held that it was not appropriate to strike out the claim as it was not just and reasonable to impose a duty of care without hearing the evidence.' 22 Therefore the effect of Osman is that in future cases, 'it will no longer be permissible simply to have action struck out on policy grounds as this would contravene Article 6 of the European Convention.' 23 However, there is an objection to the Article 6 view in that 'everyone should get their day in court and it will become much harder for public authorities to settle actions and reduce their costs,' 24 although there is a 'refrain of English negligence law that recognition of a duty of care will open the floodgates of litigation.' 25 The case of Z v United Kingdom 'arose out of the House of lords' decision in X v Bedfordhsire CC [1995] 2 AC 633, in that it was not fair, just and reasonable to admit a duty of care.' 26 In Z v UK, the 'European Court of human rights acknowledged that its decision in Osman v UK had proceeded on a misunderstanding of the English tort of negligence and the procedural rules which permit a party to apply to the court to strike out a claim on the basis that it discloses no reasonable cause of action.' ...read more.

Conclusion

2001 p.9 22 Cooke, J, Law of Tort, 5th Edition (Longman Publishing) 2001 p. 43 23 Cooke, J, Law of Tort, 5th Edition (Longman Publishing) 2001 p. 43 24 Cooke, J, Law of Tort, 5th Edition (Longman Publishing) 2001 p. 43 25 Wright, J, Tort Law and Human Rights, (Hart Publishing) 2001 p.44 26 Fairgrieve, D, 'Pushing back the Boundaries of Public Authority liability: Tort Law enters the Classroom,' (2002) Public Law p.300 27 Jones, M, Textbook on Torts, 8th Edition (Oxford University Press: New York) 2002 p.49 28A. C. L. Davies, 'The European Convention and negligence Actions: Osman Reviewed,' (2001) 117 The Law Quarterly Review p. 521 29 Jones, M, Textbook on Torts, 8th Edition (Oxford University Press: New York) 2002 p.49 3028A. C. L. Davies, 'The European Convention and negligence Actions: Osman Reviewed,' (2001) 117 The Law Quarterly Review p. 523 31 A. C. L. Davies, 'The European Convention and negligence Actions: Osman Reviewed,' (2001) 117 The Law Quarterly Review p. 522 32 Kidner, R, Casebook on Torts, 7th Edition (Oxford University Press) 2002 p.70 33Gearty, C. A, 'Unravelling Osman' (2001) 64 The Modern Law Review p. 186 34 Jones, M, Textbook on Torts, 8th Edition (Oxford University Press: New York) 2002 p.43 35 Fairgrieve, D, 'Pushing back the Boundaries of Public Authority liability: Tort Law enters the Classroom,' (2002) Public Law p.301 36 Wright, J, Tort Law and Human Rights, (Hart Publishing) 2001 p.34 1 020973391 ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our University Degree Tort Law section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Here's what a teacher thought of this essay

5 star(s)

This is a very good essay. The level of detail is extraordinary.

5 Stars.

Marked by teacher Edward Smith 23/10/2013

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related University Degree Tort Law essays

  1. concurrent liability(TM) in tort and contract.

    Many examples of this can be found in cases of professional negligence, e.g. where parties may also have a contractual relationship. (Doctors, surveyors, architects, etc). Also the method by which damages are assessed under tort and contract is very different.

  2. Consider what is meant by concurrent liability in tort and contract. Using examples from ...

    Both contract and tort have different limitation periods. In contract the period of time begins from the moment the contract is made and in tort from the time the damage is caused. Other rules are those on causation and remoteness.

  1. Duty of Care.

    - If the first is answered affirmatively, it is necessary to consider whether there are any considerations which ought to negative or reduce or limit the scope of the duty or class of persons to whom it is owed or the damages to which a breech of it may give rise.

  2. The Federal Government's "review" of the law of negligence - The aim of the ...

    This is why I believe changes had to be made to the law of negligence, and the recommendations of the Ipp committee needed to be implemented. A important factor for the ease with which plaintiffs have been able to succeed in claims for negligence is the Wyong Shire Council v Shirt "undemanding" standard of care.

  1. Fairchild v Glenhaven Funeral Services Ltd [2002].

    He failed to establish that the employer was at fault in sending him in to clean the kilns before they had cooled further. But the court concluded that the employer was at fault in not providing showers to enable McGhee to wash the abrasive brick dust off his body before cycling home.

  2. Negligence in law.

    Lord Aitkin gave his famous 'neighborhood principle' in D&S. He said that reasonable steps have to be taken towards acts or omissions that you can reasonably foresee would be likely to injure your neighbor. This established where a minimum of the neighborhood test could be established, duty of care would

  1. TORT: Advise all the parties as to their potential claims in the tort ...

    It is foreseeable that those who offer advice professionally regarding share deals can foresee such a loss and Tony may be in a proximate relationship with Henry. It is not clear however whether Technology Investments is in such a close proximity to owe such a duty.

  2. Consider the relationship between the torts of private nuisance and negligence and in doing ...

    sense is not essential...And although negligence may not be necessary, fault of some kind is almost always necessary and fault generally involves foreseeability.'5 An example of this can be seen in Bolton v Stone6. In this case the claimant Miss Stone sued a cricket club for negligence after she was

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work