Warning: Use of undefined constant no - assumed 'no' (this will throw an Error in a future version of PHP) in /home/austra01/public_html/allacademicanswers.com/wp-content/plugins/content-for-money/contentformoney.php on line 162
Introduction – The Relevance Of Causation And Remoteness In Negligence
In law, there are some aspects that have to be understood very clearly to avoid people being prosecuted for wrongs they have nod committed or failing to be prosecuted for the wrongs they have committed. In negligence, damage has to be proved in order for one to be found guilty. In this case, whenever there is a breach of duty, the complaint has to prove that the breach resulted in an injury or damage and that the injury or damage is closely related or associated to the breach. The Relevance Of Causation And Remoteness In Negligence.
The links between the breach and the obligation imposed by the law of a country are indicated by causation and remoteness. The two concepts are different in that, causation is commonly regarded as an accurate as well as logical truth while as remoteness is a legal question that is commonly based on the considerations of policy about the appropriate extent of a defendant’s liability. The Relevance Of Causation And Remoteness In Negligence.
In negligence claim, causation and remoteness of damage are very imperative as they determine the actions taken on the defendant. In this case, when the defendant neglected duty of care and in the process caused harm to the plaintiff, he or she is liable for the harm and should compensate the plaintiff accordingly. This is in the provision of the causation law and factual causation (Harpwood 2000: 14). On the other hand, the remoteness of damage means that if the harm caused was not foreseeable there was very little the defendant could have done to prevent it occurrence and therefore he should not be demanded too much than he is liable of (Mulheron 2010: 54). These two aspects are relevant in interpreting negligence claims. The Relevance Of Causation And Remoteness In Negligence.
List of References
Harpwood, V. (2000) Principles of Tort Law. New York: Routledge, 12-35. The Relevance Of Causation And Remoteness In Negligence.
Harpwood, V. (2008) Modern Tort Law. Victoria: Sage, 24-46
Hodgson, J. & Lewthwaite, J. (2007) Tort Law Textbook. Victoria: Open Press, 49-67
Lowther, J. (2011) Torts: 2011-2012. New York: Prentice Hall, 49-67. The Relevance Of Causation And Remoteness In Negligence.
Lunney, M. & Oliphant, K. (2008) Tort Law: Text and Materials. New Jersey: Wiley, 210-227
Mulheron, R. (2010) Medical Negligence: Non- Patient and Third Party Claims. London: Prentice Hall, 52-76
Ronger, E. (1994) Winfield and Jolowicz on Tort, latest edition. Sydney: Sweet and Maxwell Ltd, 33-78
The City Law School. (2008) Professional Negligence Litigation in Practice. Sydney: Wiley, 19-45. The Relevance Of Causation And Remoteness In Negligence.