Best Milk Sdn Bhd Case Study

Issue:

In this case, Joseph would sue Best Milk Sdn. Bhd for damages as a result of Best Milk Sdn. Bhd negligence under the Law of Tort. Joseph therefore in establishing negligence by Best Milk Sdn. Bhd’s technical problem would have to establish three elements namely there is a duty of care owned by Best Milk Sdn. Bhd to Joseph, there is a breach of duty by Best Milk Sdn. Bhd and failure to act that causes damage to Joseph.

Research:

Tort- Negligence: Duty of Care

Negligence enables people who have suffered harm by the carelessness of others to seek remedies and compensate , but not all careless act done by person is liable in law. The main ways in accessing to compensation is through the doctrine of the duty of care. “Neighbour principle”

Bhd owe them a duty of care, it is necessary prove that the manufacturer was in breach of that duty. Breach of duty classify the defendant have fault on not fulfilling their duty towards their claimant. The test examines whether the defendant is in breach and if he behaved as a ‘reasonable man’ in the circumstances. The reasonable foreseeability is determined by the knowledge and experience which is to be attributed to the reasonable man in the circumstances. As illustrated in the case Roe v Minister of Health [1954] 2 QB 66,

The hospital was no liable in negligence because the risk was not foreseeable. It was inappropriate to hold the hospital management liable for failing to take precautions.

Application:

The standard of care required by the law is the standard of technical skills that should apply by the manufacturer. The fact indicates that Best Milk Sdn.Bhd omitted to put the batch through the bacteria treatment process that usually kills any bacteria affecting the milk. As illustrated, the duty of care is avoiding omitting to do anything. Clearly, Joseph’s ill is caused by the defective product and is reasonably foreseeable. Therefore, the manufacturer is liable in breach of duty of care as they does not exercise normal procedure in operation. The manufacturer is responsible to operate safety system of work to ensure the milk is in a safe manor to

Bhd. Therefore, it is fair and reasonable to impose a duty of care to Best Milk Sdn. Bhd on the basis that a neighbour principal existed between two parties even no previous relationship or knowledge of each other. Besides that, the act of manufacture is the primary cause of the damage to Joseph such as Joseph required hospitalization and unable to work for 3 months. Thus, the consequences are reasonably foreseeable and not too remote. Lastly, even though Best Milk Sdn.Bhd owes a duty of care to Joseph, and there is a breach of the duty of care by Best Milk Sdn.Bhd. Howerver, Joseph also has partly responsibility of his own act. Because Joseph himself does not notice the expired date of milk.Therefore, Joseph can claim against the manufacturer but reduce damages