Legal Update 24 January 2007 John Morrell Weightmans.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Peter Adams Health and Safety - Responsibilities and the Universitys Approach.
Advertisements

PREPARED BY ERROL GOODRIDGE SAFETY AND HEALTH OFFICER LABOUR DEPARTMENT Case Law : Safety and Health.
Legal Liability Common law negligence Statutory obligations.
What You’ll Learn How to define negligence (p. 88)
4Chapter SECTION OPENER / CLOSER: INSERT BOOK COVER ART Negligence and Strict Liability Section 4.2.
Fundamentals of Law (BL502) Week 6 The Law of Torts Negligence Negligent Misrepresentation.
Torts and Legal Liability Craig A. Wallace, P.Eng
Tort Law Part 2 Negligence and Liability. Negligence Most common tort Accidental or Unintentional Tort Failure to show a degree of care that a “reasonable”
The Legal Obligations of Safety Auditors Do safety auditors belong to any profession? What is a profession?
Tort Law – Unintentional torts
Terms of Employment Sources of terms and conditions Express terms
Employers Responsibilities for Employees Working Abroad A Gentle Reminder.
Police and the Law 1 1 Police and the Constitution 10.1 Chapter 10 Police and the Law Chapter 10 Police and the Law.
General Definitions NEBOSH Certificate definitions of commonly used words or phrases. John Johnston, AIIRSM Just a collection of a few words and phrases.
14 The Law of Negligence and Liability for Negligent Professional Advice © Oxford University Press, All rights reserved.
Occupational health and the law: What’s new? Professor Diana Kloss barrister.
By Monika, Max, Vanja, Nicole KEY PRINCIPLES OF NEGLIGENCE.
THE LAW OF COMMERCIAL CONTRACT Negligent Advice Sweeney & O’Reilly 1 st Ed. pp 42 – 50 2 nd Ed. Pp
© 2004 West Legal Studies in Business A Division of Thomson Learning 1 Chapter 6 Strict Liability and Product Liability Chapter 6 Strict Liability and.
Topic 4 Involuntary manslaughter. Topic 4 Actus reus Involuntary manslaughter has the same actus reus as murder (unlawful killing) but a different mens.
 1. Duty-The accused wrongdoer owed a duty of care to the injured person  2. Breach of Duty- the defendant’s conduct breached that duty  3. Causation-defendant’s.
Torrington, Hall & Taylor, Human Resource Management 6e, © Pearson Education Limited 2005 Slide 22.1 Protection from Hazards Conflict between needs for.
Durham Public Schools Chemical Safety Program On-line Science Safety Workshop Janet Scott, Director of Science 6-12.
PUBLIC HEALTH LAW: The potential for negligence actions against public health authorities Lori Stoltz Lori Stoltz Adair Morse LLP Adair Morse LLP Board.
Unit 1.3 The Law of Sports Injury. The Coach The coach is typically the first person at the scene of an injury. The coach’s decisions and actions are.
2007- Jonathan Andrew A Evans LIFEGUARD & THE LAW WHAT HAPPENS AFTER THE RESCUE?
Medicine and the Law Causation in a fault based system.
Chapter 3 The Law of Sports Injury. The Coach The coach is typically the first person at the scene of an injury. The coach’s decisions and actions are.
Employment Law Advisory Service Managing & Reducing Risks Wayne Dunning Head of Health & Safety.
Liability in Negligence
Tutorial Business Law Law of Tort. Question 1 The driver of a car driving at a fast speed hits a pedestrian who had just stepped down from the footpath.
Possible Bases for Liability: Negligence Under State Law Cause of action? Failure to exercise degree of care that reasonable/prudent person would exercise.
Chapter 3 The Law of Sports Injury. The Coach The coach is typically the first person at the scene of an injury. The coach’s decisions and actions are.
PE 254. Negligence The legal claim that a person failed to act as a reasonable and prudent person should, thereby resulting in injury to another person.
This equipment was donated by Thompsons solicitors Stress: Still a Workplace Killer Wednesday 14 th January 2009.
ALARM SEMINAR 25 TH JANUARY 2006 CURRENT DEVELOPMENTS.
 Criminal Law  Intentional act against the public at large  Arrest made  Punishment is handed out  Examples????
Chapter 20 Negligence. The failure to exercise a reasonable amount of care in either doing or not doing something resulting in harm or injury.
Involuntary Manslaughter
 Development of Strict Liability.  Defendant’s liability for strict liability is without regard to: Fault, Foreseeability, Standard of Care or Causation.
 Understand the four elements of the tort of negligence  Understand the reasonable person standard  Understand how foreseeability (ability to anticipate.
Negligence by Snježana Husinec. Negligence  failure to exercise the care toward others which a reasonable or prudent person would do in the circumstances,
Chapter 5 Negligence Damages Civil Procedure. Negligence Duty Owed Breach of that Duty Proximate Cause of Injury or Damage.
Strict Liability and Product Liability Chapter 7.
Law in Action – Ch. 14. Tort = a civil wrong; damage to property or a personal injury caused by another person Unintentional Torts = injuries that are.
COMMON LAW CIVIL LIABILITY LAW OF TORTS 1 Environmental Law.
1 BUSINESS LAW 1 NEGLIGENCE - BREACH OF DUTY OF CARE.
CHAPTER 12: NEGLIGENCE THE BASICS Emond Montgomery Publications 1.
Week 2 Tort and Contract Theories Legal Issues in Higher Education: The Students LS517.
NEBOSH National General Certificate Unit 1: Session 1 Scope of the health and safety problem Moral, economic and legal bases for good standards of health.
Legal Aspects DEFINITIONS –Statutory law –Common (case) law –Public law and Private law –Criminal law and Civil law.
Negligence. Definition Negligence in an unintentional Tort This occurs when a person fails to use reasonable care and it causes harm to another person.
Adsett v K&L Practicable Safe place of Work Reasonably practicable.
4Chapter SECTION OPENER / CLOSER: INSERT BOOK COVER ART Negligence and Strict Liability Section 4.2.
University of Chester Forum for Research into Equality and Diversity Legal Update April 2016 The domestic scene Muriel Robison.
Legal Liability Issues
NEBOSH National General Certificate
Liability in negligence for injury to people and damage to property
Tort and negligence.
Radon Risk in Irish State Buildings
Liability in negligence
Negligence Damages Civil Procedure
Chapter 13: Product Liability
Chapter 13: Strict Liability and Prduct liability
Introduction to Civil Law
Can you recall the 'holy trinity' of negligence from yesterday?
Section Outline Unintentional Torts Negligence Strict Liability
Correction 1 Mr Mohaumud suffered a racist attack by an employee at a Tesco petrol station. He is unlikley to be able to recover damages from his attacker.
Civil Law 3.4 negligence.
Gus Lewis RYA Legal & Government Affairs Manager
Presentation transcript:

Legal Update 24 January 2007 John Morrell Weightmans

Highways  Duty to maintain – s.41 Highways Act 1980  Department of the Environment Transport and the Regions –v- Mott McDonald Ltd and others – Flooding on highway.  Statutory Defence – s.58 Highways Act 1980  Atkins v L B Ealing  Common Law Negligence  Shine v L B Tower Hamlets

Education Negligence  Marr v L B Lambeth  Negligence  Breach of Statutory Duty  Liability of Education Offices [Carty v L B Croydon]  “This is in reality an action for breach of statutory duty in disguise or an action based on a general claim of inadequate teaching or even an inadequate educational system … They are not readily characterised as submissions in a negligence case. They … may in places have force were this a case before SENDIST or even an action for breach of statutory duty but rather fade in an action for negligence.”

Social Services  Limitation  Young v Catholic Care (Diocese of Leeds) and the Home Office  S.14(2) Limitation Act 1980 K R v Bryn Alyn Community holdings Ltd – substantially subjective test  S.14(3) Limitation Act 1980  Adams v Bracknell Forest BC – substantially objective test

 Young -  Substantially objective test  Knowledge outside limitation period  No exercise of discretion under S.33 Limitation Act 1980  A v Nugent  When did the claimants first have knowledge that they had suffered significant injury? That is, when should they reasonably have considered that they had suffered an injury sufficiently serious to justify their instituting proceedings for damages against a defendant who did not dispute liability and was able to satisfy a judgment?

 S.14 Limitation Act 1980 – all 3 claims, knowledge outside limitation period  S.33 Limitation Act 1980 – 2 claims no exercise of discretion, 1 claim, discretion  L + B Reading Borough Council and Others  No duty owed to parent wrongly accused of abuse  [D v East Berkshire Community NHS Trust]

 Adoption  B v A County Council  [A v Essex County Council]  Duty of care owed – foreseeability, proximity, fair, just and reasonable  No liability on facts

Trees  Poll v Viscount Asquith of Morley  A level (ii) inspector would have realised that a close-up inspection of this particular tree was required

Human Rights  Van Colle v Chief Constable of the Hertfordshire Police  Article 2 – Right to Life  Did the police do all that could reasonably be expected of them to avoid a real and immediate risk to life of which they had, or ought to have had, knowledge?

Employer’s Liability  Pennington v Surrey County Council  Judge – Unsuitable equipment under Regulation 4 of the Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations 1998  Court of Appeal – Inadequate instruction and training under Regulation 11(2)(d) of the 1998 Regulations