Law

Law

Task 1: Tort Law

1. Contrast liability in TORT with contractual liability

A tort is considered as a civil wrong in the common jurisdictions of law. It tackles such circumstances in which the behavior and attitude of an individual is a reason of unfair treatment, harm, or loss to some other person. It is not essential for a tort to be an unlawful act hut it pertains to inaction that necessarily becomes a threat for the other people. This law permits the recovery of loss to the harmed people. The plaintiff is required to exhibit that lack of action or action was most probably the reason of harm and threat if he wants to prevail in a tort law case. Thus, it is basically a civil wrong in such a way that the person commits it committed against other individual instead of the state (Deakin, Johnston and Markesinis, 2008).

There are differences in the liability with TORT and that with the contractual obligations. For instance, if an individual does not success in maintaining his entire property or a part of it injures or harms another person, then the damages to that person will be the responsibility of the property owner. It will stay the same even if it is passerby having absolutely no mutual contract with this individual. On the other hand, a contractual liability takes place when there are two or multiple parties that pledge particular things to one another. For instance, a person may hire an individual to do the cleaning of the house for a particular amount of money in return (Deakin, Johnston and Markesinis, 2008). If the agreement is defaulted by any one of the parties involved, this results in the violation of contract. Moreover, the engaged party may be compensated by the legal remedies.

2. Explain the nature of liability in negligence.

The liability in the negligence liability generally lies with the party to whom the duty of care is owed. If the violation of duty occurs, leading to any personal injury, financial loss or any other matter, then it becomes the liability of the negligent party to compensate the innocent party. For instance, the road users demand the duty of care from the driver, just in a similar manner as there is a duty of care that the medical professional owes to their patients. In case of negligence by wither the medical professional or the driver, there will be a violation of the duty of care and the owners will be liable for compensating for their actions that may have ended up in the loss or injury of another person (Mark, Ken, 2003).

However, some added elements need to be considered for proving the negligence liability. Firstly, the nature of the injury or harm done must be foreseeable. This refers to the fact that the potential of harm and damage will be foreseen by a reasonable person in particular circumstances. Secondly, there needs to be a legal proximity, guiding a close relationship between the two parties (Marsh & Soulsby, ...