Liability : Liability And Liability

A) The topic concerning this case is negligence law. The issue is whether Simon would be successful perusing a negligence claim.

A strict liability offence is one where it is not necessary for the prosecution to prove any mens rea. In most cases of strict liability even if one did not have the intent to commit a crime, however reasonable, in relation to a particular element of the actus reus of an offence, they can still be convicted. This can be shown in reference to Prince and Hibbert. Prince (1875) the girl was taken by Prince even though he knew she was in the possession of her father as he believed she was 18. Mens rea was needed for him to be sentenced and this was recognized as he had the necessary intention to remove her. Hibbert (1869) the defendant had sexual intercourse with a 14 year old

There are three elements that must be present for an act or omission to be negligent; (1) The defendant owed a duty of care towards the plaintiff; (2) The defendant breached the duty of care by an act or omission; (3) The plaintiff must suffer damage as a result - be it physical, emotional or financial. The court might decide that Freddy (the plaintiff) was owed a duty of care by Elvis (the defendant) if they find that what happened to Freddy was in the realm of reasonable forseeability - any harm that could be caused to a 'neighbour' by Elvis' actions that he could reasonably have expected to happen. The 'neighbour principle' was established in the case of Donoghue v. Stevenson (1932).

The case study selected for week three centers on a liability and assumption of risk case study. In this case study, Brent Thomas and George Banks are facing liability charges after Ricky Watts sustained a serious injury during hockey practice (Essex, 2016). In this situation, Thomas is the school principal, and Banks is the hockey coach as well as the gym teacher (Essex, 2016). Ricky obtained injuries after improperly blocking the puck (Essex, 2016). This case study was selected because it highlights a situation that will likely be faced by all future school leaders. Sports are popular among students, and there is inherent risk in each sporting event. A school is open to liability if they do not ensure that proper protocols are met.

There are many defendants in this case. First and foremost Dale, the loss prevention officer for Wal-Mart, is a defendant because he intentionally restrained Bob against his will and the restraint was unlawful. Dale also failed to follow company rules; Dale was supposed to watch a video that explained how to catch and deal with thieves but decided not to watch the video. The second defendant would be Dale’s supervisor. The supervisor recorded a pass on an exam that dale did not take. The exam Dale failed to write was based on the video that Dale did not watch. The third defendant would be Wal-Mart; Wal-Mart assumes liability because they could be at fault for not properly training staff. Bob would want to take action on

Currently, there is a lawsuit pending in Vigo Superior Court which is alleging that negligence by a property owner contributed to the death of three people. These deaths were a result of a fire which engulfed a rental property. The lawsuit claims that both the property owner and the property agent had failed to ensure that there were functional smoke detectors installed within the home. This home was occupied by Kayla Lewis, her daughter Gabrielle, and her stepbrother Jeremiah. Gabrielle age 2, was pronounced dead at the scene amongst the early morning fire at the home. Jeremiah age 5, was transported from the scene but later died at the hospital. Gabrielle's sister Chloe age 3, and her mother Kayla were both hospitalized due to injuries sustained in the fire. Kayla made it to the hospital, but later died.

Product liability is a law where the manufacturer, supplier seller and others who produce and sell products to the public are responsible for the injuries that is caused by that product. When individuals are harmed by an unsafe product, they may have a cause of action against the persons who designed, manufactured, sold, or furnished that product

Police officers deal with both crime and the public on a daily basis, so they need to be diligent in their knowledge of Civil Rights Laws in order to avoid lawsuits that can come from those rights being violated. “The best way to avoid liability is logic and training” (Wells, 2014). The costs for civil liability lawsuits involving police officers/departments just for lack of or inadequate training based on a survey in 2000 were substantial as “the average award for plaintiffs was about $492,000 and attorney fees for the prevailing party averaged $60,000” (Spencer, 2007, p. 2). Some of the most common types of liability lawsuits include “false arrest, unlawful detention, excessive force, assault & battery, unlawful search, unlawful

The Bible, specifically, the Old Testament, provides numerous examples of torts and the remedies afforded for such offenses. The Bible is also the guide for moral conduct, with the best example being the Ten Commandments. In the Old testament, there are multiple references to moral and in-moral behavior, torts, civil and family matters. Exodus 21:18-22:6, provides the best examples of tort law in biblical times. To that end, the instructions communicated directly from God to Moses to "set before" the Israelites (21:1). They are as follows:

What Is It? Liability coverage is insurance that protects your assets if someone is injured on your property or if you injure someone or damage someone's property.

The burden of proving contributory negligence is on the defendant. Sooserian v. Clark, 287 Mass. 65, 67, 191 N.E. 763(1934). The defendant’s defense of contributory negligence stands on a different footing. As shown in the record, there is no evidence that the plaintiff himself engaged in any negligence conduct in direct connection with the accident. The alleged claim that the plaintiff was not wearing a seatbelt does not defeat the claim for the defendants’ liability because it is not asserted that otherwise would have happened if he did not have his seat belt on. Moreover, the negligence of the driver far outweighs the alleged contributory negligence of the plaintiff leading to the accident because the defendant was the one whom hit the tree

The vision of change is the roadmap of the company desires to guide the initiative for the future. The advice is to allow the vision statement to direct the realization of change. The technique is to direct the change of various circumstances with perception and objectivity of the organization. Consequently, the misuse of the vision declaration is to surrender the direction and focus (Palmer, Dunford, & Akin, 2009). Therefore, the declaration of the navigator is desperate because different interpretations exist among various employees.

Contingent Liability is a condition that refers to the possibility of a future event happening and addresses the responsibility of the party liable should the event take place. In today’s real estate market both sellers and buyers may have contingencies stated in the terms and conditions for selling and purchasing a home. The most common contingent liability are guarantees to debt.

This paper will be discussing the concept of strict liability along with the concept of absolute liability within the R. v. Sault Ste. Marie (1978). In doing so, this paper will explain how strict liability offences strike a good balance between the policy rationales for absolute liability in regulatory offences and the criminal law principle that only the morally blameworthy may be punished, and how the courts have interpreted absolute liability offence and their relationship with the Charter of Rights.

The English Law on Vicarious Liability An employer is responsible for damage caused by the torts of his employees acting in the course of employment. This is known as ‘vicarious liability’[1]. Essentially, vicarious liability is where the employer is generally substituted in terms of liability for the employee, the employee also has liability but the resources of the employer such as insurance makes them more financially attractive to the claimant. The mechanism of vicarious liability is arguably the best compromise between the needs of tort victims and the freedom of businesses as the employer usually has insurance to cover the tort of the employee, making it more financially viable to the