TORT LAW/VICARIOUS LIABILITY

Tort Law/Vicarious Liability

Tort Law/Vicarious Liability

Introduction

The word “tort” comes from the passive participle of the Latin verb torque back, and it got through the French entry into the English legal language. Liability under the model of continental European civil law (as opposed to common law) but also of the Scottish law is in contrast depicts or called tort. In general, it means conduct that adversely affects the legal right of others and is thus, "wrong". For a healthy society, it is necessary that it should be free of anti-social elements and that an individual should have the freedom to exercise his rights without the restriction by others.

Tort Law

A tort is a civil or private act that harms other people or their property. The harm may involve physical injury, emotional distress, invasion of privacy, or defamation (injuring a person's character by publication of false statements). The injured party may sue the wrong doer to recover danag.es for the harm or loss. A tort is not the result of a breach of contract, which would be settled under contract law. Torts are part of common law.

Case analysis

In this case, Bobby incurred some losses simply because the nurse wanted to follow procedures at the hospital. Rachel had taken the best step by taking Bobby to the hospital even before she needed to seek permission from the teacher or the supervisor. This is a responsible act and everyone should demonstrate it in his or her daily activities irrespective of his profession. However, Bobby arrives at the hospital on time but never received any meaningful treatment that would help to save his hand from that severe injury. The reason for this is that the hospital had to check on his mother to see whether she has an insurance policy that would cover the bills. In this case, the situation was already worse and therefore, the nurse would have acted under her duty of care, tries, and save Bobby's hand before enquiring on his parents. The nurse should have also followed the EMTALA provision that according to Ashley, (2004) requires immediate service to such a person.

We can therefore, argue that nurse Williams failed or rather violated her duty of care. She knew perfectly well that if she left Bobby's hands unattended, it would lead to amputation; yet she did that. The City General Hospital is also liable for the violation the duty of ...