Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
In this context, risk is the combination of the frequency (likelihood) and the consequence of a specified hazardous event. Several factors are likely to be considered when deciding whether or not a risk has been reduced as far as reasonably practicable: [2] [3] Health and safety guidelines and codes of practice
The council found that even though the crew were careless and breached their duty of care, the resulting extensive damage by fire was not foreseeable by a reasonable person, although the minor damage of oil on metal on the slipway would have been foreseeable. Viscount Simonds delivered the judgment of the Board and said:
Consequential damages must also be pled with greater specificity. The plaintiff has it on their burden to prove that the damages occurred are not only the proximate consequence of the breach, but also that they were "reasonably foreseeable" or within the "contemplation of the parties" when the parties agreed to the terms of the contract. The ...
Generally, the simplest way to think of the risk-utility test is the Hand Formula applied to products. The Third Restatement of the Law, Torts: Products Liability §2(b) [ 1 ] favors the risk-utility test over the Second Restatement of the Law, Torts §402(a), which favored the consumer expectations test . §2(b) states, in part, "A product is ...
It determines if the harm resulting from an action could reasonably have been predicted. The test is used in most cases only in respect to the type of harm. It is foreseeable, for example, that throwing a baseball at someone could cause them a blunt-force injury. But proximate cause is still met if a thrown baseball misses the target and knocks ...
The purpose of the doctor's duty to take care is to protect the mountaineer against injuries caused by the failure of the knee, not rock falls. Even though the injury might be reasonably foreseeable, the doctor is not liable. In The Empire Jamaica (1955) 1 AER 452, the owners sent their ship to sea without properly licensed officers. The pilot ...
The Summary. The Los Angeles-area fires are a worst-case scenario caused by powerful winds that struck after months without rain. Fire experts, past reports and risk assessments had all ...
Overseas Tankship (UK) Ltd v The Miller Steamship Co or Wagon Mound (No. 2), [1] is a landmark tort case, concerning the test for breach of duty of care in negligence. The Judicial Committee of the Privy Council held that loss will be recoverable where the extent of possible harm is so great that a reasonable man would guard against it (even if the chance of the loss occurring was very small).