Home > Tort Law

Tort Law

Question: Assess the development of economic tort by way of ‘Passing Off’.

Answer: This essay will assess the development of economic tort by way of ‘Passing Off’. Passing off is considered to be a misrepresentation of a business with another in a way likely to...


Read more of the answer →

Details: - Mark: 61% | Course: Tort Law | Year: 1st | Words: 1067 | References: No | Date written: Not available | Date submitted: November 18, 2009 | Coursework ID: 634

Question: The compensation culture in this country has been described as a damaging myth. Critically examine whether this is the case and whether the passing of the Compensation Act 2006 was necessary.

Answer: It has been suggested that the law of tort has allowed the integration of compensation in to being an aspect of everyday society. By explaining what the law of tort is and...


Read more of the answer →

Details: - Mark: 60% | Course: Tort Law | Year: 1st | Words: 1980 | References: No | Date written: Not available | Date submitted: October 22, 2008 | Coursework ID: 187

Question: Angela was visiting her friend Betsy. She complained of a severe headache and Betsy gave her a box of painkillers that had been prescribed by her (Betsy’s) doctor. On the outside of the box and on a leaflet inside, there was a note reading: “Do not consume with alcohol. May cause severe nausea and diarrhoea.” Angela had drunk two small glasses of wine. She took two of the painkillers (the recommended dose for an adult). An hour later she became violently ill and was admitted to the Downbeat Hospital. She was examined by Conrad, a doctor, and told him about the pills she had taken. Conrad arranged for her to be admitted and prescribed a drug to treat her condition. Daphne, the nurse on duty, misread the doctor’s notes and gave her only 10 per cent of the dosage that Conrad prescribed. Angela became more seriously ill and required painful and debilitating abdominal surgery. There is a strong possibility that, if she had been given the correct dosage, she would have recovered after a few days.

It has now been established that Angela suffered from an extremely rare allergy to one of the ingredients of the painkillers. No other case has been identified where a person taking one of these painkillers suffered a comparable reaction. It cannot be established whether the wine had contributed to the reaction.

Advise Angela as to any claims in negligence against the Downbeat Hospital.

Answer: The above question demands discussion whether Betsy (B), Conrad (C) and Daphne (D) had breached duty of care to Angela (A) and whether there is any intervening factor that is likely to...


Read more of the answer →

Details: - Mark: Not available | Course: Tort Law | Year: 1st | Words: 2368 | References: No | Date written: Not available | Date submitted: October 26, 2017 | Coursework ID: 1032

Question: ‘In my view, the time has come to recognise the legal duty of the police force to take action to protect a particular individual whose life or safety is, to the knowledge of the police, threatened by someone whose actions the police are able to restrain. I am not convinced that this requires a development of the common law but, if it does, I am sanguine about that prospect. Certainly, I do not believe that rules relating to liability for omissions should inhibit the law’s development to this point’.
(Lord Kerr in his dissenting judgment in Michael v Chief Constable of South Wales (2015) UKSC 2)

Discuss the extent to which the police owe a duty of care to individuals in the tort of negligence.

Answer: The tort of negligence concerns a civil wrong, when a duty of care is breached, or a duty is omitted. A duty of care is a legal responsibility to provide reasonable care...


Read more of the answer →

Details: - Mark: Not available | Course: Tort Law | Year: 1st | Words: 1482 | References: Yes | Date written: March, 2016 | Date submitted: May 27, 2016 | Coursework ID: 973

Question: Tort Problem Question: Luke had just obtained his driving licence and borrowed his father’s car to take his girlfriend Jane on a trip to the coast. Luke and Jane got into the car whilst Jane’s mother Amy saw them off from the balcony of her flat. Jane turned around in the front seat to wave to her mother. To do so she took off her safety belt and twisted around. Luke was trying to show off by pulling away at such a high speed that he left black tyre marks on the road. He got distracted by Jane’s movement and because he was travelling so fast, he lost control of the car, and it crashed into the pavement and a tree. Jane was flung through the windscreen and obtained multiple broken bones and severe lacerations to her face. Luke, who was wearing his seatbelt, suffered only a few bruises.

Jane will have to undergo extensive cosmetic surgery and the doctors told her that although they would do the best they can, there was unfortunately no way she would be able to continue pursuing her dream of becoming a fashion model. Jane was due to sign, the day after the crash, a modelling contract which would have earned her £2million. Because of her injuries she now cannot pursue this.

Amy, Jane’s mom, saw the whole accident from the balcony of her flat. Seeing her teenage daughter flung through the windscreen of the car and then severely injured gave her a massive shock. She became so depressed that she had to stop working as a primary school teacher. Her GP diagnosed her with post-traumatic stress disorder.

Advise Luke as to his possible liability and defences in negligence.

Answer: The issue is to advise Luke as to his potential liability as a driver in negligence to Jane and Amy. His actions will be assessed according to the principles of negligence in...


Read more of the answer →

Details: - Mark: Not available | Course: Tort Law | Year: 2nd/3rd | Words: 1390 | References: Yes | Date written: January, 2015 | Date submitted: February 01, 2016 | Coursework ID: 950

Question: Leonard and Sheldon are scientists who share a flat, No 1, on the ground floor of an apartment building. Neither of them owns a car, but their apartment has a parking space assigned to it. Sheldon rented the flat first, and Leonard subsequently moved in with him. When Leonard moved into the flat, he agreed to sign a ‘Roommate Agreement’, which sets out the terms under which he is allowed to live there. One provision is that, if Leonard fails to observe certain rules, Sheldon is entitled to lock Leonard in his bedroom as punishment for an entire weekend. Last weekend, Leonard broke one of the rules and Sheldon enforced the punishment clause. Leonard used his bedroom window to come and go without Sheldon knowing.

Will has recently moved into the same building as Leonard and Sheldon, in flat No 4. Will owns a motorcycle, and, rather than parking it in his assigned space, he decides to park it in Leonard and Sheldon’s space, so that he can chain it to a lamppost. He parks it in their space for the first time on Sunday. Sheldon notices that the motorcycle has appeared in their space, but does not know who owns it. He therefore writes the following note:

‘Your bike is in my spot. You cannot park it there. Remove it immediately.’

Will sees the note when he returns home on Monday evening. He picks it up and reads it but, believing that the note is unnecessarily rude, does not remove the motorcycle. On Tuesday, Sheldon sees that the note has been removed, but that the motorbike remains. Sheldon therefore writes another note:

‘Your bike is still in my spot. Remove it. Or else.’

Sheldon also places posters around the building urging action against ‘The Phantom Parker’. Will finds the second note and sees the posters. He feels threatened, but still does not remove the vehicle. Sheldon believes that the owner of the bike is probably Zack, who moved into the apartment building at the same time as Will, but into a different flat. He spends the rest of the week posting letters through Zack’s letterbox, accusing him of the being the ‘Phantom Parker’, and repeatedly knocks on Zack’s door to challenge him. Zack has since developed a very rare psychiatric condition as a result of these events, which has left him unable to work for the past two months.

In December, Leonard and Sheldon host a Christmas party in their apartment. They invite their friends Howard, Bernadette, Raj and Penny. Bernadette is Howard’s girlfriend and Penny is Leonard’s girlfriend: both women are blonde. At the party, David, one of Leonard’s colleagues, walks past Penny, brushing his hand against her arm. He does the same thing two more times. On each occasion, Penny shouts ‘Stop it!’ Later in the evening, David sees a blonde woman standing under some mistletoe. Thinking that it is Penny, he goes up behind her and whispers in her ear, ‘Are you sure you don’t fancy a kiss?’ The woman is actually Bernadette, who jumps with surprise. She turns around and tries to throw her drink at David: however, David ducks out of the way and the liquid lands on Raj. Howard goes up to David and shakes his fist, saying ‘If you had kissed my girlfriend, I would have punched you.’

Advise the parties as to any potential tort liabilities arising from these facts.

Answer: Sheldon V Leonard Leonard cannot bring a claim against Sheldon. Even though Leonard was detained, he cannot claim under false imprisonment. The two prerequisites to bring a claim under false imprisonment are:...


Read more of the answer →

Details: - Mark: Not available | Course: Tort Law | Year: 1st | Words: 1827 | References: Yes | Date written: November, 2014 | Date submitted: November 25, 2015 | Coursework ID: 941

Question: State the primary differences between public nuisance and private nuisance. Explain how the tort of nuisance differs from the tort of strict liability.

Answer: The general definition of negligence can be described as carelessness, omission to do something a reasonable man would do; doing something a reasonable & prudent man would not do. (Blyth v Birmingham...


Read more of the answer →

Details: - Mark: Not available | Course: Tort Law | Year: 1st | Words: 1091 | References: No | Date written: Not available | Date submitted: May 12, 2014 | Coursework ID: 875

Question: Problem scenario: David is a bus driver, who is employed by Collins Coaches Ltd (CCL). He regularly drivers a group of very elderly people to an afternoon tea party. On one of these regular trips, the brakes on the bus failed for no apparent reason which caused the bus to crash. The bus was an old vehicle that had not had a maintenance service since 2011.

Emma, who was passing round sweets to the rest of the passengers, had undone her seat belt at the time of the crash. Emma, aged 82, was badly hurt in the crash and wished to claim compensation for her injuries. CCL are refusing to give any information about the brakes.

Laura, Emma’s daughter was not entitled to be on the trip and had not been allocated a seat. Despite this she secretly decided to go on the trip and sneaked onto the coach. She sat on the floor of the coach and she was aware that this was against the law. Laura broke her arm in the crash and missed her skiing holiday which had cost her £1,000, as a direct result.

Ignoring insurance matters and any contractual issues, advise Emma and Laura regarding their possible negligence claims. Use cases to illustrate your answer.

Answer: Emma is a passenger, thus has the relationship of client and service provider. There is foresight of damage and proximity. Emma can have a claim under statutory duty, section 1 Compensation Act...


Read more of the answer →

Details: - Mark: Not available | Course: Tort Law | Year: 1st | Words: 1499 | References: Yes | Date written: November, 2013 | Date submitted: April 30, 2014 | Coursework ID: 870

Question: Case study: Amber Valley Primary School was closed 6 months ago by Amber Borough Council (ABC), the local education authority, which owns all the land and buildings. The school has been standing empty while ABC attempts to find a buyer for the site. Although ABC placed fencing around the site, local residents reported that youths had broken into the site on a number of occasions.

Last week a group of youths from a nearby young offenders institution, operated by Chigley Services Ltd (CS) under contract to the Home Office, broke into the disused school and set fire to it. The youths had been clearing rubbish from a neighbouring stream and were supposed to have been under the supervision of Justin and Jason, both of whom are CS employees. However, Justin and Jason had gone for a cigarette break and left the youths unsupervised at the time the break-in occurred.

The fire caused damage to neighbouring property including a baker's shop owned by Mark. It is likely to be many weeks before the business can reopen and Mark stands to lose many thousands of pounds in lost profits.

It later transpired that the fire would not have had time to spread to neighbouring property had the Fire Brigade acted more swiftly. The Amber Valley Fire engine was unavailable at the time and another engine had to be dispatched from Leicester. The crew got lost on the way because they put the wrong address in the sat-nav (satellite navigation) device.

Advise Murphy in respect of any claims he may have (if any).

Answer: In order to have a successful claim in a tort case, it must be clear that the defendant owes claimant a duty of care and there was a breach of the duty...


Read more of the answer →

Details: - Mark: Not available | Course: Tort Law | Year: 2nd/3rd | Words: 3070 | References: Yes | Date written: January, 2014 | Date submitted: April 26, 2014 | Coursework ID: 868

Question: Case Study: Amber Valley Primary School was closed 6 months ago by Amber Borough Council (ABC), the local education authority, which owns all the land and buildings. The school has been standing empty while ABC attempts to find a buyer for the site. Although ABC placed fencing around the site, local residents reported that youths had broken into the site on a number of occasions.

Last week a group of youths from a nearby young offenders institution, operated by Chigley Services Ltd (CS) under contract to the Home Office, broke into the disused school and set fire to it. The youths had been clearing rubbish from a neighbouring stream and were supposed to have been under the supervision of Justin and Jason, both of whom are CS employees. However, Justin and Jason had gone for a cigarette break and left the youths unsupervised at the time the break-in occurred.

The fire caused damage to neighbouring property including a baker's shop owned by Mark. It is likely to be many weeks before the business can reopen and Mark stands to lose many thousands of pounds in lost profits.

It later transpired that the fire would not have had time to spread to neighbouring property had the Fire Brigade acted more swiftly. The Amber Valley Fire engine was unavailable at the time and another engine had to be dispatched from Leicester. The crew got lost on the way because they put the wrong address in the sat-nav (satellite navigation) device.

Advise Mark in respect of any claims he may have (if any).

Answer: Introduction This question requires an examination of the tort of negligence, specifically in relation to establishing the necessary causative links to permit the recovery of damage. A successful claim in the tort...


Read more of the answer →

Details: - Mark: Not available | Course: Tort Law | Year: 2nd/3rd | Words: 3077 | References: Yes | Date written: January, 2014 | Date submitted: April 08, 2014 | Coursework ID: 853


Page 6 of 7« 3 4 5 67 »

New user?

Registering is fast
and easy

Welcome back

Gain access

  1. Register with us
  2. Pay for instant access
  3. Or submit 3 pieces
    of your work for
    free access

Categories

Adobe Reader is required to access all coursework & essays. (pdf)
PayPal handles payments on our behalf. All major credit cards and currencies accepted.
A PayPal account is not nessesary.