Negligent Torts
- Submitted by: bigman1
- Views: 798
- Category: Politics: Moral Issues
- Date Submitted: 03/23/2011 02:42 PM
- Pages: 6
- Report this Essay
Negligent Tort
James Nelson
Bus670 Legal Environment
Dr. Bob Miller, PHD
September 20, 2010
Negligent Torts
Negligence law was created by the Courts due to the enormous amount of injuries that happened during the 19th century in America. Although the law initially was not very favorable to injured plaintiffs, the reason was very clear. If the infant industries of the Industrial revolution were held responsible for all the harms they caused, the country’s industrial development would have been seriously restricted. (Mallor, et. al., 2010) This writing will investigate the negligent tort, and analyze the concepts of but for and proximate causation, duty of care and the various remedies available for tort liabilities that are found. To compare situations from a different country, in the UK originally, a claim of negligence could be brought within six years of the date of breach. Then, the Latent Damage Act of 1986 changed the tort claims to either within six years of the date of damage, or within three years of the date of knowledge. Even if both or one of these periods was still running, the claim would be barred once 15 years had elapsed from the date of the defendant’s breach of duty. (Murdoch, 2006) Obviously, this breach of duty can be associated with or compared to duty of care in America.
In a case claiming negligence, the Appellate Court of Appeals in the UK held that the appellants had the necessary knowledge, that valuable rights had been lost, and that although their land lords might not have realized this or might have decided not to rely upon the point, the chances of either of these things happening were not good. Ultimately, the decision was made not on whether or not negligence had taken place, but on whether or not the appellants knew that negligence had taken place. In an article from 2006, the but for causation concept is present.
(Murdoch, 2006)
IEI is defined as Idiopathic environmental intolerance, and this means unknown...
James Nelson
Bus670 Legal Environment
Dr. Bob Miller, PHD
September 20, 2010
Negligent Torts
Negligence law was created by the Courts due to the enormous amount of injuries that happened during the 19th century in America. Although the law initially was not very favorable to injured plaintiffs, the reason was very clear. If the infant industries of the Industrial revolution were held responsible for all the harms they caused, the country’s industrial development would have been seriously restricted. (Mallor, et. al., 2010) This writing will investigate the negligent tort, and analyze the concepts of but for and proximate causation, duty of care and the various remedies available for tort liabilities that are found. To compare situations from a different country, in the UK originally, a claim of negligence could be brought within six years of the date of breach. Then, the Latent Damage Act of 1986 changed the tort claims to either within six years of the date of damage, or within three years of the date of knowledge. Even if both or one of these periods was still running, the claim would be barred once 15 years had elapsed from the date of the defendant’s breach of duty. (Murdoch, 2006) Obviously, this breach of duty can be associated with or compared to duty of care in America.
In a case claiming negligence, the Appellate Court of Appeals in the UK held that the appellants had the necessary knowledge, that valuable rights had been lost, and that although their land lords might not have realized this or might have decided not to rely upon the point, the chances of either of these things happening were not good. Ultimately, the decision was made not on whether or not negligence had taken place, but on whether or not the appellants knew that negligence had taken place. In an article from 2006, the but for causation concept is present.
(Murdoch, 2006)
IEI is defined as Idiopathic environmental intolerance, and this means unknown...