Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
A defendant does not have actual knowledge if they believe something to the contrary. The standard is subjective and the belief of the defendant need not be reasonable, only honest. [4] For example, in R v. Williams [5] the defendant intervened in what he thought was a mugging but was in fact a citizen's arrest.
Knowledge is an awareness of facts, a familiarity with individuals and situations, or a practical skill. Knowledge of facts, also called propositional knowledge, is often characterized as true belief that is distinct from opinion or guesswork by virtue of justification. While there is wide agreement among philosophers that propositional ...
Definitions of knowledge try to describe the essential features of knowledge. This includes clarifying the distinction between knowing something and not knowing it, for example, pointing out what is the difference between knowing that smoking causes cancer and not knowing this.
Price submits that knowledge can comprise any one of five different mental states which he described as follows: (i) actual knowledge; (ii) wilfully shutting one's eyes to the obvious; (iii) wilfully and recklessly failing to make such inquiries as an honest and reasonable man would make; (iv) knowledge of circumstances which would indicate the ...
Common knowledge – knowledge that is known by everyone or nearly everyone, usually with reference to the community in which the term is used. Customer knowledge – knowledge for, about, or from customers. Domain knowledge – valid knowledge used to refer to an area of human endeavour, an autonomous computer activity, or other specialized ...
Actual notice is a law term, used most frequently in civil procedure. It is notice (usually to a defendant in a civil proceeding) delivered in such a way as to give legally sufficient assurance that actual knowledge of the matter has been conveyed to the recipient. [ 1 ]
The person with actual knowledge must be in a position of authority and must fail to respond adequately to the situation. Constructive knowledge would require that a school district “knew or should have known” of the harassment and failed to address it. This doctrine was developed in the Supreme Court case Meritor Savings Bank v.
The harshness of the doctrine of constructive notice is somewhat reduced by the "Rule of Indoor management" or "Turquand's Rule". The rule derives its name from the case of Royal British Bank v Turquand, where the defendant was the liquidator of the insolvent Cameron's Coalbrook Steam, Coal and Swansea and Loughor Railway Company.