Case Study Sample on English Tort Law: Compensating for Civil Wrong Doing

Introduction

English tort law is overall in regards to compensation for harm to individual’s rights to safety and health, property, their reputations, environment or even economic interest. A tort is generally a civil wrong and not concerning criminal law, it requires that the victim to be paid for the various damages caused in terms of money. A tort law is seen to build the primary pillars of the law of obligation. Based on the case study, there are various main parties and the main issues identified; again all parties are further are specifically advised of their respective rights and liabilities in tort as stated below.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

Case

Ariana is liable for negligence of Christiano’s child. However, it is for the victim, Cristiano to prove that the defendant owed him a “duty of care”, that is alleged to have been breached. Therefore if the victims are successful, he needs to be awarded for the harm caused.

Establishing a Duty of Care for Negligence

A duty of care makes Araina to be responsible for taking reasonable care to prevent harm that can be possibly caused to Christiano’s child. It is evident that the care of duty exists based on the characteristics of the nature of relationship between the parties. For instance, it emerges due to the fact that Arian had a substantial degree of control over the actions of the mentioned child. In this case, since the defendant tended to have signifying control, then she had unwarranted obligations to take responsibility of her actions to ensure that no harm was inflicted to the reliant party.

Breach

In case a party owes a duty of care to another individual, the court of law will have to decide on the duties Arana owed to Cristiano “standard of care”. It is obvious that the standard of care was never met, thus the defendant had acted in total breach of the duty she owed to the victim. It is noted that the test for breach is the standard care and the one that exist here is that that of an ordinary caretaker who is supposed to be competent and exercising her duty as a babysitter in handling a mere child. Based on Blyth v Birmingham Waterworks Co [1856], here the judge said that, “Negligence is the omission to do something which a reasonable man guided upon those considerations which ordinarily regulate the conduct of human affairs, would do, or doing something which a prudent and reasonable man would not do.” And that the defendant was liable for tort of negligence.

We are told that children are incapable of taking care of themselves and that is the reason why Cristiano made an agreement with Arana to watch over his child, the fact that Ariana did not watch over the child in a sensitive area such as near a road tend to indicate some level of negligence. Based on Blyth v Birmingham Waterworks Co [1856], as some torts as regarded by specific interest of the claimant that is protected, the tort of negligence tends to protect various interests such as those of claimant individual. It further suggests that some of those interests build more issues for the court of law, in the unique sense that it is typically unclear to what extent the law need to link liability to the negligent infliction of some types of harm inflicted. As Lord Bridge suggested in Caparo Industries plc v Dickman[1990]: “It is never sufficient to ask simply whether A owes B a duty of care. It is always necessary to determine the scope of the duty by reference to the kind of damage from which A must take care to save B harmless” this has over time help as a reference to help in making necessary decision s in the courts.

Conclusion

Therefore, the clamant had various defenses such as that every claimant in a negligence action has to overcome particular legal “hurdles” to be able to establish if a tort of negligence had actually been committed. Additionally to be actionable tort, the defendant’s inefficient reasonability has to occur in the stated context of a duty to take care.