ipl-logo

Delictual Liability

1002 Words5 Pages

The case of A Gibb & Son (Pty) Ltd v Taylor & Mitchell Timber supply Co (Pty) Ltd 1975 (2) SA 457 (W) (hereinafter “the Gibbs case”) dealt inter alia with negligence and delictual liability in respect of product liability for defective merchandise, whether such liability existed in South African law and if so what needed to be proved to in order to claim damages in respect of same.
Facts
A Gibb & Son (“the Plaintiff”), a building company contracted to erect scaffolding at the building site located in Johannesburg. In order to build more scaffolding the Plaintiff ordered extra saligna scaffolding planks from a merchant seller Mitchell Timber Supply (“the Defendant”). The Plaintiff accordingly received the planks and upon receipt only checked …show more content…

The court established in its findings that the enquiry should begin with the question of whether the dilgens paterfamilias (a person's responsibility both personally and professionally) in his position would have inspected the goods at all. If this inspection falls short of the requisite standards then becomes a question with many aspects, but is a question that only arises after the plaintiff has proven that the first question should be answered in the …show more content…

the kind of trade), the methods of employed and the expectations of those who ordinarily deal in it. Such a study may reveal that the specific dilgens Mercator (diligent merchant) would inspect only some of his merchandise and would carry out his inspection more comprehensively in respect of some if his goods than others. The Court established that where the goods being sold are not something inherently dangerous but where potential harm caused by defects in them depends on how it us used the study of the market place must be refined to a question of whether the dilgens Mercator anticipates that, as probability, the user will examine the goods before using them in the manner in which they are ordinarily used and thereafter use them as such. If he does anticipate this then such an examination will probably reveal any defects then Aquilian liability does not attach to a defendant in a comparable situation. The Merchant then does not foresee danger and when it is not foreseen, there is nothing to guard against, and the duty to take this kind of care is not

Show More
Related
619 Words | 3 Pages

Date: June 24th, 2011 Re: Mrs. Hatter vs. Foods Deluxe DISCOVERY The plaintiff, Mrs. Hatter, by and through her counsel, Bruce Wayne, and pursuant to rule 34 requests defendant Foods Deluxe, respond to the following interrogatories, requests for admission, and requests for documents. I. Interrogatories 1. State the name of the person or persons answering these interrogatories. 2.

Read More
838 Words | 4 Pages

“The defendant is liable only if the product is defective when it leaves his hands. There must be something wrong with the goods. If they are reasonably safe and the buyer’s mishandling of the goods causes the harm, there is no

Read More
788 Words | 4 Pages

(Clark Fountain, 2017) Analysis – It appears that the location of the pallets was clear and obvious. The pallets did not possess a risk that would be inherently dangerous to an individual who is using the walkway. This condition appeared to be common and was known to be innocuous in everyday life that it did not have the ability to impose liability on the land and business owner. The plaintiff breached his own duty to assure his safety by not maintaining his direction of walking which does not pose a liability to the defendant. In this case, the plaintiff has been negligent to care for his own

Read More
517 Words | 3 Pages

Read Case 10-2, Welge v. Planters Lifesavers, on page 243. What theory of liability did Justice Posner use in finding the defendant liable? Judge Posner used the strict product liability theory in finding the defendant liable (Herron, 2011). Under the strict product liability theory, K-Mart (seller) would be held liable for defects in their products even if those defects were not introduced by them; also for failing to discover them during production (Herron, 2011).

Read More
1045 Words | 5 Pages

The plaintiff is not estopped by her SSDI and long term disability claims. However, the issue should have been decided by the jury. The court foreclosed to grant the plaintiff was not a qualified individual. The issue is whether the district court correctly granted summary judgment in the favor of the defendant because the shaker table rotation rule at issue was an essential function of the employee’s job.

Read More
991 Words | 4 Pages

Legal Issues Presented & Was a Valid Prima Facie Case Established In this case, Vehar v.

Read More
506 Words | 3 Pages

The Plaintiff did not fulfill her contractual obligation to negotiate her claim with the Defendant prior to filing the lawsuit. The Defendant affidavit is attached herein. CONCLUSION Based on the foregoing fact, and as the Plaintiff did not fulfill her contractual obligations, Defendant requests the Court to dismiss this case complying with forgoing New York federal court decision. Date: New York, New York June 18,

Read More
456 Words | 2 Pages

• Some Cases related to Company’s Liability in respect of Tort I. Bettel et al. v. Yim, (1978), 20 O.R. (2d) In 1976, Howard Bettel and some friends entered Ki Yim’s store. After the boys began acting outrageously, an employee asked them to leave. Instead of immediately leaving the property, the boys went to the front of the store and began throwing wooden matches on the sidewalk.

Read More
667 Words | 3 Pages

Besides, in each government case, the gathering bringing the suit must build up remaining to arraign the activity. Generally the topic of standing is whether the prosecutor is qualified for have the court choose the benefits of the debate or of specific issues. It is shameful for the government courts to excite a case by an offended party whose remaining to sue is established on family law rights that are in question when arraignment of the claim may adversy affect the individual who is the wellspring of the offended party 's guaranteed standing. At the point when hard inquiries of household relations are certain to influence the result, the reasonable course is for the government court to stay its hand instead of connect with determination a profound inquiry of elected sacred law. There is an immeasurable contrast between Newdow 's entitlement to speak with his youngster which both California law and the First Amendment perceive and his asserted right to shield his little girl from impacts to which she is uncovered in school in spite of the terms of the guardianship request.

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
1268 Words | 6 Pages

This is a case concerning negligence. The plaintiff, Mr. Davis’s wife, wishes to bring this case to the court under negligence law because of the death of her husband in a car accident. There are two defendants in this case. The first defendant, GM Holden Ltd, is a car manufacturer. The second defendant, Brown’s employee, is a truck driver.

Read More
879 Words | 4 Pages

Everyone was told to maintain silence, stand up and following that everyone was told to sit down. Then the Plaintiff’s Lawyer Mr REYNOLDS stood up, introduced himself and his party and was given the chance to speak. Following that he started to describe the case to the judges and explaining and providing references from previous cases and also mentions what Polish Club Limited breached. After that the defendant’s lawyer that is MR CLAY was allowed to speak for the defendant who argued for a while and defended Polish Club Limited. The Honour and the other judges questioned Mr Reynolds, the plaintiff’s lawyer, about evidence and reference provided to make sure whether the claim they are making against Polish Club Limited comply and whether Polish Club Limited breached the law.

Read More
719 Words | 3 Pages

A civil lawsuit is normally filed against those who are negligent in order to obtain monetary compensation for damages. In the movie, the two corporations are found negligent in their actions of disposing of waste into the town of Woburn’s water supply. As a result, Attorney Jan Schlichtmann filed a suit against the two corporations and used geological evidence, experts, and eyewitnesses to prove the involvement of the two corporations. According to the textbook, Elements of negligence are as follows: abiding by standard practice, the duty of care, breaching the duty of care, casual connection, and actual harm. The two corporations were supposed to abide by standard practice, however, by owning plants alongside the contaminated water supply, they both breached their duty to properly dispose of waste.

Read More
1460 Words | 6 Pages

Here a compensation tribunal was set up to compensate the families of victims who had died in the Stardust tragedy. The grieving father of one victim sought a review of a decision made by the tribunal to award the mother of a victim compensation and the father no compensation. The court refused to quash the decision of the tribunal and, strangely, agreed that there were circumstances which justified awarding of compensation to one parent and not the other. This decision was made by a court which was quite critical of the approach taken by Lord Diplock in GCHQ. Henchy J. said he would be ‘slow to test reasonableness by seeing if it accords with logic’ and would be ‘equally slow’ to accept the moral standard criteria believing it a vague and inconsistent principle to base reasonableness on.

Read More
1154 Words | 5 Pages

Tort of negligence is the failure to act as a reasonable person to exercise the standard of care required by the law and resulting in damage to the party to whom the duty was owed. To prove negligence, the claimant must show that the defendant causing the damage was not only the actual cause of damage. He also show that the proximate cause of the damage. Proximity is the legal relationship between the parties from which the law will attribute a duty of care. And to prove negligence the type of the damage that occurred must have been foreseeable.

Read More

More about Delictual Liability

Related Topics

Open Document