Tort of Negligence case study The law of contract: a contract is a legally binding agreement, its a promise between two or more to parties with certain things, each party must fulfill there promises if one of them don’t fulfill there promise then the contract is breached (VOID). The law of tort: A tort is a civil wrong in the sens that is committed against an individual, tort is compensated by a sum of money called “ DAMAGES”. Contract laws and tort laws share many similarities. At the most basic level.
But there differences are a lot more than there similarities that is why they are filed separately.
In the contractual claim the defendant and the plaintiff must be in a contract so there can be a fault, but in tortuous liability the parties might not be familiar with each other before the omission (act). They differ in the way courts award damages. For contracts the propose of damages is to regain the parties to there former situation before the breach of the contract. In torts damages are to compensate the damaged party.
There is more freedom in the law of contract than the law of tort where as in tort nature impose it self. The law of tort covers so many matters of life, and the law of contract is similarly extensive.
Tort of negligence: Negligence is unintentional neglect, in contrast to intentional torts or strict liability torts. Is a carelessness behavior, its an an act or omission is done without due regards to its result or outcome. In order to succeed in action for negligence, a plaintiff must prove three elements or ingredients: a. That the defendant owes him duty of care. b.
That the defendant is in breach of that duty.
c. That he is entitled to damages. In practice, negligence by a business entity, selling goods can mean the failure to properly design the product, select the materials, produce, assemble, inspect, and/or test the product, and place warnings adequate to the average consumer regarding any hazards of which an ordinary person might not be aware. Manufacturers, distributors, and retailers all have some duties to carefully assemble or inspect merchandise where doing so would be within the realm of reasonably prudent behavior.
For example, a car dealership might be held liable for negligently putting customized wheels on a car by failing to properly tighten the lug nuts, so that within twenty miles of operation the car loses a wheel and the driver is seriously injured. But a grocery store will not be liable for failing to inspect all its canned peas for possible metal objects hidden in the cans.
Liability may attach, however, on the basis of strict liability, or on some contractual bases such as the implied warranty of merchantability. For services claims will arise when the service provider has failed to exercise that degree of care that is usual.
Malpractice is the usual name given to a professional’s failure to provide that degree of care, Anyone offering a service to the public may be liable, including doctors, lawyers, bankers, insurance agents, hair stylists, architects, or designers. Businesses may be held liable in a negligence case for providing goods or services. With slightly different standards apply for each kind of case.
Proving all elements of a negligence case requires that the plaintiff introduce some credible evidence for each element. Failing to do so will ordinarily result in the judge giving the defendant’s motion to dismiss the plaintiff’s case.
In the case of “ Donoghue v. Stevenson” The principles of the tort of negligence was well represented in that case. “ where the manufacturer was held liable for providing a damaged product for Mrs Donoghue his employers were reckless enough to let a snail fall into one of the ginger beer bottles he was vicariously liable, since the fault had occurred in the hours of work under his supervision, that makes him unfit supervisor and responsible for paying any compensation that the court demands him to pay. references john cook law of tort PDF businesses& tort PDF law of tort, BY: BARRISTER OLUWATOMI VINCENT