ipl-logo

Peter Negligence Case Study

901 Words4 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: Explain what is ment by duty of care

Theoretically, Sue can sue Peter under the tort of negligence if she can prove that Peter owed them a duty to care, breach of duty and damage (or loss) resulting from the breach. Additionally, Sue must be suffering losses or damage as a direct consequence of the negligence from Peter. The duty of care refers to the circumstances which are recognised as a legalised obligation to care for the duty one is performing, and failure to adhere to the standards may result in the responsible personnel being liable to pay for the damages due to his/her breach of the duty of care. First existence of the law with regards to “Duty of Care” originated from Lord Atkin’s neighbour principle from Donoghue v Stevenson (1932) AC 562. In this scenario, we will …show more content…

The standards set are objectively judicious by the “Reasonable Man Test”. There are four reasons that Peter is liable for his negligence in “Duty of Care”. The first factor is the degree of risk involved; Peter must understand and assess the natural risk of his dogs’ reaction to strangers. The second factor would be the lack of precautions set by Peter with regards to the potential risk that his dogs provide. He did not set up necessary precautions like leashing the dogs and closing off the main gates to prevent his dogs from approaching strangers aggressively. The third factor speaks about the seriousness of the injuries. Due to Peter’s dogs not taken care of, their aggressive approach gave Sue’s mother a shock and a second cardiac arrest occurred, which lead to her death. Huge dogs tend to lean more towards the aggressive spectrum of the dog species, and Peter must understand the risk of these dogs as compared to the tamer species. Lastly, Peter must understand the importance of the activity and evaluate the risk involved. IF the dogs tend to be more aggressive in nature as mentioned, preventive measures must be …show more content…

He failed to understand his obligations and responsibilities as an Owner of the dogs and thus with his negligence, caused fatal damage to Sue and her family. He allows the dogs to be uncontrolled in its perimeters and risked the potential harm that the dogs will provide because they are not kept tamed from other personnel. Without proper education of the dogs and the awareness of oneself to reduce the potential risk that his dogs provide, Peter will be held responsible for the damage cause in this

Show More
Related
695 Words | 3 Pages

The case that I have found to write about is the case of Shakeel “Blam” Wiggins and the New York Police Department in New York City which happened in September of 2013. This case was originally tried in the state of New York court in New York City. It was based on the fact that a NYPD cop didn’t properly fill out a search-warrant application that turned up a weapon as well as a handgun and a cocaine cache. Unfortunately, Mr. Wiggins is an accused drug dealer with a prior record and he may likely walk due to “a technicality.” Therefore, the New York City Police Department as well as the New York City police union were very upset because a dangerous person may be back on the streets due to a supple mistake.

Read More
1713 Words | 7 Pages

No. The primary assumption of the risk applies to eliminate a property owner’s duty of care

Read More
466 Words | 2 Pages

GENB 4350 Assignment 1 Not even three months ago did I have a massive moral quandary in which I had to choose between saving my dog’s life or letting him suffer for the rest of his life. Last year my dog, Milo, suddenly required surgery because of a ruptured disk in his back. At any given time would he go into fits of screaming. This would happen when he was moved in a way that hurt his back. It was hard to watch him cry out in a way I had never heard him before.

Read More
556 Words | 3 Pages

Julian wants to sue David, the other player. In his complaint, which tort theory is Julian’s attorney most likely to allege and what will he have to prove for Julian to be successful? 
Julian’s attorney is most likely to allege Intentional Tort for his complaint to be successful. An intentional tort occurs whenever someone intends an action that results in harm to a person’s body, reputation, emotional well-being, or property. During the game David kicked Julian in the head while Julian was in possession on the ball.

Read More
1775 Words | 8 Pages

In this case, Ray Knight’s parents (plaintiffs) are seeking liability compensation against the School District (defendants) for the alleged negligence of their son’s middle school. School officials gave Ray Knight a three day suspension for unexcused absences. Although, the School District’s policy is to give parents phone notification and written notification through the mail for student suspension, Knight’s middle school officials sent the written notice home with Knight. In an attempt to hide the information from his parents, Knight crumpled the notification and disposed of it away.

Read More
248 Words | 1 Pages

The court concluded since he was not harboring the animal he is not an owner at the time of the injury. Id. at 1267. Similarly in Severson, the court held that under the Animal Control

Read More
1093 Words | 5 Pages

It also was great support to his argument. Manjoo explains that both dogs and his son don’t act in a socially acceptable way. He loves his son and despises dogs and touches on how people get more annoyed with the parent of a misbehaving child than the owner of a misbehaving dog. His point in this comparison is to prove that he makes an effort not to disturb those around him while proving himself not impartial.

Read More
1765 Words | 8 Pages

“ There is no credible evidence that breed determines or predicts dangerousness. Dangerous dog laws should be narrowly drawn to define dangerous dogs as those who have either attacked a person or another animal without justification..” ("Position Statement). Dogs have the potential to be whatever their owner wants them to be. Depending what they are exposed to throughout their life determines what the dog will become.

Read More
1094 Words | 5 Pages

It takes a lot of responsibility but these dogs under no circumstance are harmful to

Read More
367 Words | 2 Pages

The dog bite statistic is included to prove the point that dogs are unpredictable. Even though I love dogs, when a strange dog approaches me, or my children walk up to a dog in public, I remember the scar on my best friend’s face. A puppy she had known since its birth, suddenly, jumped up and bit her when she was a child. I am constantly reminding myself to stay calm, and not to underestimate dogs that I do not know well. I also find myself frequently reminding my children to request permission to pet the dog, pay attention to the dog’s reactions to them, and to keep their faces away from the dog’s

Read More
1368 Words | 6 Pages

Health Care Law: Tort Case Study Carolann Stanek University of Mary   Health Care Law: Tort Case Study A sample case study reviewed substandard care that was delivered to Ms. Gardner after having sustained an accident and brought to Bay Hospital for treatment. Dr. Dick, a second-year pediatric resident, was on that day in the ED and provided care for Ms. Gadner. Dr. Moon, is the chief of staff and oversees the credentialing of all physicians at Bay Hospital.

Read More
719 Words | 3 Pages

A Civil Action is a movie based on a true story about an epic courtroom showdown where Jan Schlichtmann, a tenacious personal-injury attorney files a lawsuit against two of the nation's largest corporations. He accuses, Beatrice Foods and W. R. Grace Company for causing the deaths of children from water contamination by the illegitimate dumping of chemical wastes into natural water sources. The first issue brought up in this movie is concealing or misrepresenting of the truth also known as deceit. Deceit occurs when an individual withholds or misrepresents information by making false statements with the intent of altering another person’s position on a matter. In the movie, Jan does some personal investigations after he notices that there’s

Read More
698 Words | 3 Pages

Introduction Recently in Australia, canine breed bans have become more common after incidents of attacks and dangerousness. It is expected that people follow the laws regarding some purchases of certain breeds and ownership. My objective through my personal interest project is to discover what leads to the canine bans, whether this affects society’s views towards certain breeds and what these actions reflect about Australian society. I personally, strongly believe that depending on the animal, that the concept of ‘nature vs nurture’ is an important aspect to consider when the banning of a domestic pet is being considered.

Read More
503 Words | 3 Pages

Case Facts In November of 1988, Nicole, a 13-year-old girl consummated a murder-suicide pact with a friend in Maryland. Nicole’s counselor was made aware of her suicidal thoughts and discussed it with her. However, Nicole denied making statements about intending to commit suicide and the counselor failed to notify administration or Nicole’s parents. In March of 1989, the father of the girl and plaintiff in this case, Stephen Eisel, brought negligence charges against the Board of Education of Montgomery County, the Superintendent of Schools of Montgomery, the Sligo Middle School Principal, and Dorothy Jones, the School Counselor.

Read More
1153 Words | 5 Pages

The law of tort applies duties of the civil law in respect to a wide range of behavior which are relevant to a business activity, this area of law serves a very important role for consumers and those are doing business with them. As stated above in order to have a sure fire claim when claiming under the tort of negligence it is compulsory to fulfill the three requirement, the first requirement is the " duty of care " it is stated that whether the defendant owes the plaintiff a duty of care, is definitely a question of the law. it is always onus that the plaintiff establish the existence of a duty of care, but usually in most cases it is very straightforward to establish a duty of care, as long as it is provided that the relationship between parties falls within the duty of care for example a doctors owes a duty of care to his/her patients, or motorist owe a duty of care to the other road users, even architects owe a duty of care to the people who are occupying the specific building, these are just few examples of owing a duty of care. if the relationship between the parties does not fall within the established duties of care, than the plaintiff needs to be able to show the 2 things which are (1) '' it was reasonably foreseeable that the defendant act or omission could cause harm to someone in the plaintiff's position ", which means that it the plaintiff must be able to show that during the time of the incident it was reasonably foreseeable that the defendant's code of conduct could cause harm to someone in the plaintiff's position.

Read More

More about Peter Negligence Case Study

Related Topics

Open Document