Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
In the usual case, having established that there is a duty of care, the claimant must prove that the defendant failed to do what the reasonable person ("reasonable professional", "reasonable child") would have done in the same situation. If the defendant fails to come up to the standard, this will be a breach of the duty of care.
McGhee v National Coal Board [1972] UKHL 7, 1 W.L.R. 1, is a leading tort case decided by the House of Lords.The Lords held that where a breach of duty has a material effect on the likelihood of injury then the subsequent injury will be said to have been caused by the breach.
The usual rules rely on establishing that a duty of care is owed by the defendant to the claimant, and that the defendant is in breach of that duty. The standard test of breach is whether the defendant has matched the abilities of a reasonable person. But, by virtue of the services they offer and supply, professional people hold themselves out ...
Duty (criminal law), is an obligation to act under which failure to act , results in criminal liability. Such a duty may arise by a person's status in relation to another, by statute, by contract, by voluntarily acting so as to isolate someone from help by others, and by creating a danger.
Under this formula, duty changes as circumstances change—if the cost of prevention increases, then the duty to prevent decreases; if the likelihood of damage or the severity of the potential damage increases, then duty to prevent increases. There are other ways of establishing breach, as well. United States v. Carroll Towing Co., 159 F.2d 169 ...
In a minority view, Mustill LJ. argued that if it is established that conduct of a certain kind materially adds to the risk of injury, if the defendant engages in such conduct in breach of a common law duty, and if the injury is the kind to which the conduct related, then the defendant is taken to have caused the injury even though the ...
In my opinion, that duty is not a fiduciary duty, although it is a duty actionable in the equitable jurisdiction of this court. . . . I consider that Hamilton owed P.B.S. a duty, both in law and in equity, to exercise reasonable care and skill, and P.B.S. was able to mount a claim against him for breach of the legal duty, and, in the ...
The ambulance service would not owe a duty of care under negligence for refusing to respond to a 999 call (though they may be in breach of statutory duty). Also, the burden upon the claimant of showing a causative want of proper care (considering the particular conditions of an emergency) would ordinarily provide ambulance services with what he ...