SWEETS ICE CREAM PVT LTD

Sweets Ice Cream Pvt Ltd

Sweets Ice Cream Pvt Ltd

Is Patricia likely to be an employee of ASP or of Sweets?

An action in negligence is available to anyone who has suffered injury by reason of the negligence of another. The plaintiff must establish:

1. That a duty of care was owed by the wrongdoer to the plaintiff (i.e. that it was reasonably foreseeable that negligence on the part of the wrongdoer would cause injury to the plaintiff). Except in situations where the pollutant is deposited on the plaintiff's land, this is often difficult to prove in a pollution context; 2. That the wrongdoer failed to exercise the standard of care expected of him/her (this is the objective standard of the reasonable man); and 3. That the plaintiff has suffered damages as a consequence. (Damages are limited by concept of remoteness i.e. the damage must have been reasonably foreseeable). Pure economic loss not consequent upon damage property will not support an action in negligence.

Negligence suits have historically been analyzed in stages, called elements, similar to the analysis of crimes. An important concept related to elements is that if a plaintiff fails to prove any one element of his claim, he loses on the entire tort claim. For example, let's assume that a particular tort has five elements. Each element must be proven. If the plaintiff proves only four of the five elements, the plaintiff has not succeeded in making out his claim.

Common law jurisdictions may differ slightly in the exact classification of the elements of negligence, but the elements that must be established in every negligence case are: duty, breach, causation, and damages. Each is defined and explained in greater detail in the paragraphs below. Negligence can be conceived of as having just three elements - conduct, causation and damages. More often, it is said to have four (duty, breach, causation and pecuniary damages) or five (duty, breach, actual cause, proximate cause, and damages). Each would be correct, depending on how much specificity someone is seeking. "The broad agreement on the conceptual model", writes Professor Robertson of the University of Texas, "entails recognition that the five elements are best defined with care and kept separate. But in practice", he goes on to warn, "several varieties of confusion or conceptual mistakes have sometimes occurred."

If she were an employee of ASP would she have an action forcommon law negligence against that company in relation to herinjury?

An action under the Rylands v Fletcher doctrine is available to anyone who has suffered injury as the result of the escape of a dangerous substance from adjoining lands. To maintain an action under the Rylands v Fletcher doctrine the plaintiff must establish:

1. That the defendant kept a substance that was likely to cause damage should it escape the defendant's land; 2. That the substance did escape; and 3. That the plaintiff suffered damage as a consequence. Note that negligence or fault is not a necessary element of the ...