Home > Tort Law

Tort Law

Selma visited the firm yesterday to request advice. Yesterday she parked her car in
front her neighbours house. She was not obstructing any driveways and there was
certainly nothing to prevent her from parking there. The following day Selma
observed that a wheel clamp had been placed on her car. It was accompanied with a
note which stated that the wheel clamp would only be removed on the condition that
she did not park there again. Selma also believes that her neighbour has stolen plants
from her garden and put rubbish on her land. Prepare a report on the relevant legal
issues for your senior partner
Discuss the tortious liability of Selma's neighbour considering in particular the
offences of trespass.
Mr Mohammed if also requesting advice. He recently bought a house and was
informed by the surveyor that it was structurally sound. It now transpires that the
house is subsiding. Mr. Mohamed purchased the house without the aid of a mortgage
so he personally instructed the surveyor. Write a letter to Mr. Mohammed making
sure it includes consideration of the following points.
(a) Could Mr. Mohammed claim for negligence?
(b) Is there any other area of law other than tort at which he can make a claim? If so
advise which course of action he should take providing reasons for your answer.

Answer: TASK 1 Introduction: Below I have compiled a report outlining legal issues on Selma circumstances. Discussing the tortious liability and particularly on the offence of trespass and nuisances. What is a tort?...

Read more of the answer →

Details: - Mark: 83% | Course: Tort Law | Year: 2nd/3rd | Words: 2282 | References: Yes | Date written: October, 2007 | Date submitted: April 18, 2009 | Coursework ID: 482

Question: Psychological Injury – Problem Question
A coach, full of young children coming back from a day trip to the theatre, is involved in a multiple vehicle pile-up on the motorway, caused by negligent driving of Steve, the driver and owner of one of the cars in the pile-up. One of the children, Abbey, is seriously injured in the accident. Her foster parents are at work and cannot be contacted immediately. When they eventually get to the hospital, five hours later, they are traumatized by the state in which they find their foster daughter. Although Abbey makes a full physical recovery both she and her parents develop PTSD. Another of the children, Cosmo, was trapped in the wreckage and suffered serious head injuries. Bob, a passing motorist who stopped to help, and Ray an ambulance worker who arrived at the scene, both struggle long and hard to free him. However, when they eventually do so, he dies and both Bob and Ray go on to develop depression as a result, Cosmo’s father is beset with grief for many months as he identifies his son’s body at the mortuary 2 hours later.

Bob’s behaviour has been very erratic ever since the accident and has been prone to fits of uncontrollable rage. Last week he got into an argument with his neighbour over a trivial matter which culminated in Bob hitting him over the head with a heavy object. The neighbour had died as a result of his injuries and Bob is now facing many years in jail and the loss of his job and family.

Advise Abbey and her parents and Bob, Ray and Cosmo’s father.

Answer: Abbey v Steve Abbey would succeed in a claim for the personal injury sustained as Steve owed a duty to every other road user (Nettleship v Weston) and has clearly fallen below...

Read more of the answer →

Details: - Mark: 80% | Course: Tort Law | Year: 1st | Words: 1648 | References: No | Date written: Not available | Date submitted: May 06, 2018 | Coursework ID: 1043

Mr. and Mrs. Duckworth are the proprietors of a hotel in Weatherfield. One of their former
guests Peter Barlow checked out of the hotel last week, but Mr. & Mrs. Duckworth
discovered that he had stolen a number of items from the hotel room, for example table lamps
and coffee tables. Also he had disturbed other guests when he returned to the hotel intoxicated
one evening. Mr. & Mrs. Duckworth decided he is no longer welcome at the hotel and
informed him of this. Despite this Mr. Barlow walked into the hotel last week and attempted
to book a room. Mr. and Mrs. Duckworth refused and on his way out Mr. Barlow tripped on a
loose wire and sprained his ankle. Mr. Barlow has informed the Duckworths that he will be
taking action against them for occupiers liability. Mr. and Mrs. Duckworth have requested
advice relating to this. Can they really be sued when they made it clear to Peter Barlow that he was no longer permitted on the premises? Your supervisor has requested you write a report relating to this.
Mr. and Mrs. Duckworth employ a number of people at their hotel. Last week the chef, Betty
Turpin was particularly busy and asked the waiter, Todd Grimshaw, for assistance. Due to
confusion in the kitchen Betty accidentally used sour milk in the sauce she was making. Also,
Todd gave food containing dairy products to Norris, a customer with an allergy to dairy products.
The Duckworths were aware of his condition and had assured Norris that his dietary requirements
would be catered for. Another customer suffered food poisoning it is thought due to the food
cooked with sour milk. The Duckworths have requested a letter clarifying the situation. Your
supervisor has requested you write a letter to the Duckworths advising whether they will be liable
for the actions of their employees. Explain what strict liability is and explain whether this applies
to them.

Mr. Duckworth visited your office yesterday to ask whether the behaviour of Todd Grimshaw
could be his responsibility. He is often playing practical jokes and yesterday deliberately tripped up Betty in the kitchen who was carrying hot water at the time. Both members of staff were burnt and Betty is suing Mr. Duckworth as she feels it is his responsibility to employ competent staff.
Your supervisor has requested you write her a memorandum explaining how you think the law
applies to this scenario.

Answer: TASK 1 Re: Peter claiming for injuries sustained on the premises and liability of Duckworth’s Introduction: I have compiled a report in regards to the present circumstances of Duckworth’s. I have commented...

Read more of the answer →

Details: - Mark: 80% | Course: Tort Law | Year: 2nd/3rd | Words: 2282 | References: Yes | Date written: October, 2007 | Date submitted: April 20, 2009 | Coursework ID: 483

Question: Case Study

Goofey, Massive, Badboy and Spiv are members of a famous four-piece rap music act called “Parental Advisory Crew”. To celebrate the release of their latest CD, they hold a concert in a London park. The concert is being shown live on television, and is supposed to begin with a fireworks display, organised by Rocket Ltd. Owing to Rocket Ltd’s negligence, there is a huge explosion which demolishes the stage and injures the four band members.

Advise all of the following claimants as to their claims in negligence against Rocket Ltd:

· Alice is Goofey’s fiancée. She has been engaged to Goofey for two years, but does not live with him, because she and Goofey are morally opposed to cohabitation before marriage. She is standing in the audience, at a safe distance from the explosion, when she sees Goofey get all his teeth knocked out by a microphone stand that has been thrown into the air by the blast. She thinks Goofey has been killed. In fact, however, Goofey has only sustained injury to his teeth, and is subsequently fitted with an attractive set of dentures. For months after the event, Alice cannot lead a normal life. She cries every day, and frequently has nightmares in which she dreams that Goofey has died.

· Belinda is Massive’s personal trainer. She is standing backstage when the explosion occurs. She rushes onto the burning stage to try to save her client from being burned alive. Unfortunately, she is too late, and Massive dies in her arms. Belinda, suffers post-traumatic stress disorder as a result of this experience.

· Celine is Badboy’s step-sister. She is not present at the concert, but she sees live television pictures of the explosion. She suffers immediate shock when she sees flames engulf the turntables behind which Badboy is standing. She subsequently becomes an alcoholic and has to give up work.

· Daisy met Spiv two weeks ago in a bar in New York. Acting on impulse, they got married. Daisy is not present at the concert, as she is having dinner with her new lover. She learns about the disaster when a friend sends her a text. She immediately drives to the scene, where she is told by a policeman that Spiv has been taken to hospital. Daisy drives to the hospital, but by the time she gets there Spiv has died. She identifies his body in the hospital mortuary. Daisy has now developed a drug problem which has resulted in a change in her personality. She blames this on the shock of her husband’s death.

Answer: This question is concerned with psychiatric illness. This area of law is not coherent and answers are to be found in “not in logic but in policy”. To succeed in a claim...

Read more of the answer →

Details: - Mark: 76% | Course: Tort Law | Year: 2nd/3rd | Words: 1880 | References: No | Date written: Not available | Date submitted: November 27, 2012 | Coursework ID: 754

Question: Problem scenario: Molly is a single mother. She takes her daughter Rhonda (a two year old infant) to a local playground. While lighting a cigarette, Molly starts talking with another young parent, Dilbert. Molly is distracted by Dilbert's good looks and gritty charm. Meanwhile, Rhonda starts to wander over to the road.

Dilbert notices a possible catastrophe and rushes out after Rhonda. Dilbert just manages to save Rhonda from being run over by Bob, who is driving a van within the speed limit and quite safely. However, Dilbert has too much forward momentum and collides with Bob's van. Dilbert is seriously injured. Bob skids off the road and crashes into some playground equipment. Luckily, no children are using the equipment.

Laura, driving at speed behind Bob sees the above-related events and put her foot down hard on the brakes. Laura's car skids on an oil slick and crashes into a tree. Some distance behind the tree was Leonard. Leonard thought that Laura's car might hit him and he started running away screaming 'oh Lord, don't take me now!' Leonard has an underlying personality disorder and develops a paranoid fear of going out into the street. As a result he loses his job and his livelihood.

The accident involving Leonard is witnessed by Sherry, Rhonda's grandmother, who is also at the park. Sherry suffers from a brief fright, but believes that she will be alright. However, she later develops post-dramatic stress disorder as a result of this event, combined with the news that Rhonda barely escaped serious injury. She had not seen the incident involving Rhonda herself because she hadn't busy setting out the picnic lunch.

Identify any action available in the tort of negligence and analyse the elements of the tort accordingly.

Answer: Dilbert v Molly Carmarthenshire CC v Lewis1 sets out that if someone has charge over a child they are expected to take reasonable care to prevent them from causing harm to others....

Read more of the answer →

Details: - Mark: 75% | Course: Tort Law | Year: 2nd/3rd | Words: 2297 | References: Yes | Date written: January, 2013 | Date submitted: February 03, 2015 | Coursework ID: 903

Question: In Glasgow Corporation v. Muir [1943] 2 A.C. 448, Lord Macmillan said:

“The standard of foresight of the reasonable man is in one sense an impersonal test. . . Some persons are by nature unduly timorous and imagine every path beset with lions; others, of more robust temperament, fail to foresee or nonchalantly disregard even the most obvious dangers. The reasonable man is presumed to be free both from over-apprehension and from over confidence.”

In the light of this statement, and with reference to decided cases, examine the factors to which the courts commonly have regard in determining the standard of care in negligence.

Answer: To succeed in a negligence claim, there has to be a breach of duty. There is a breach of duty, if the defendant did not exercise the standard of care expected of...

Read more of the answer →

Details: - Mark: 74% | Course: Tort Law | Year: 2nd/3rd | Words: 1217 | References: No | Date written: Not available | Date submitted: November 27, 2012 | Coursework ID: 752

Question: 'Due to some of the difficulties of bringing an action in negligence, the tort of misfeasance in public office has recently become a popular alternative cause of action.’

Discuss the above statement, with particular reference to the scope of the tort
of misfeasance in public office.

Answer: The use of the tort of negligence by claimants attempting to recover for any loss they have experienced, may find numerous difficulties in establishing their cause of action....

Read more of the answer →

Details: - Mark: 74% | Course: Tort Law | Year: 1st | Words: 1315 | References: No | Date written: February, 2009 | Date submitted: March 27, 2009 | Coursework ID: 560

Question: ‘Any sensible occupier will exclude the onerous duty of care that he owes to
both visitors and non-visitors as regards his occupation of premises.’

Assess the accuracy of this statement.

Answer: The first area to be considered is the duty of care that an occupier of premises owes to his lawful visitors. This area is governed by the Occupiers’ Liability Act 1957, which,...

Read more of the answer →

Details: - Mark: 73% | Course: Tort Law | Year: 2nd/3rd | Words: 2249 | References: No | Date written: March, 2009 | Date submitted: September 01, 2009 | Coursework ID: 567

Question: Critically evaluate the points of law in the case of Campbell v Mirror Group Newspapers (2004) 2 AC 457.

As part of your answer please address the following points:
1) The relationship between European Convention of Human Rights (ECHR) and the common law in this case.
2) The relationship between the right to privacy and the right of free speech.

Answer: “In this country, unlike the United states of America, there is no over-arching, all-embracing cause of action for ‘invasion of privacy’.” However, “The common law or more precisely, courts of equity, have...

Read more of the answer →

Details: - Mark: 72% | Course: Tort Law | Year: 2nd/3rd | Words: 1999 | References: Yes | Date written: November, 2010 | Date submitted: April 22, 2012 | Coursework ID: 734

Question: Breach of Duty

In order for the defendant to be liable for negligence, the first stage is to show that there is a duty of care owed to the claimant. Once this is done, it must then be shown that the defendant breached his duty. Brach of a duty of care essentially means that the defendant has fallen below the standard of behaviour expected in someone undertaking the activity concerned. In Blythe v Birmingham Waterworks Co, Alderson B stated that “Negligence is the omission to do something which a reasonable man, guided upon these considerations which ordinarily regulate the conduct of human affairs would do, or something which a prudent and reasonable man would not do.” This is a question of fact.

Therefore, two questions arise from this statement:

1. How high is the standard of a reasonable person? Should the courts always apply the reasonable man test objectively, or can they take into account subjective elements?

2. How do we determine what a reasonable man would do?

Answer: The Standard of the “Reasonable Person” As we have seen from the statement of Alderson B in Blythe v Birmingham Waterworks Co, the standard of care is an objective one, so the...

Read more of the answer →

Details: - Mark: 71% | Course: Tort Law | Year: 2nd/3rd | Words: 5928 | References: No | Date written: Not available | Date submitted: March 29, 2011 | Coursework ID: 654

Page 1 of 712 3 4 5 6 7 »

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


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.