·Sometimes people excuse the damage they cause by saying this was a mistake or that they did not mean to cause the damage. Is this a valid excuse to avoid liability for damage caused? Explain your answer. With the above question about people that is liable to a damages due to their civil wrong and now finding an excuse to avoid damages. In law, there is no excuse and the defaulter would therefore be liable for their offence committed except if the judge in a court of law based of their reasonable doubt found that it was not proven true that such person would be liable for a damages.
XI. Breach of contract Breach is defined as an act of failing to observe or comply with the law, agreement, or code of conduct. In the other hand, contract means a spontaneous, cautious, and legally binding agreement between two or more parties. Therefor breach of contract is failing to comply with the legal agreement between parties. In a wider meaning, breach of contract is the failure to comply or be able to perform in whole or part whatever is in the contract without any legal reason or excuse.
The responsibility relies on the supplier as stated in the Negligent Misrepresentation Exception from the Restatement (Second) of Torts §552(1) (1977): “One who supplies information during the course of his business...in which he has a pecuniary interest has a duty of reasonable care and competence to parties who rely upon the information in circumstances in which the maker was manifestly aware of the use to which the information was to be put and intended that it be so used.” (Scribd, n.d.) Squish, indirectly through ProPack, claimed they relied on the professional opinion of the Thomco agent. It would be Thomco’s duty to be knowledgeable about their products and aware of the damages that could occur as a result of unreliable information. Although mistakes do occur, Squish alleged there was a breach of ordinary duty that resulted in a large financial loss for them that otherwise should not have happened.
Introduction Undue influence is a vital concept under the contract law. It exists in situations where one party to a contract entered into an agreement with the other party due to the result of pressure exerted to him by that other party. The innocent party who has been subjected to the pressure may then seek an action to set aside the said contract. Undue influence can be said to be developed from the doctrine of duress under the English Common Law. Hence, it can be said that undue influence has certain similarities to the doctrine of duress under the English Common Law, such as rendering a contract to become voidable, except a few distinctive features.
Negligence is the breach of a duty caused by the omission to do something which a reasonable man, guided by those considerations which ordinarily regulate the conduct of human affairs would do, or doing something which a prudent and reasonable man would not do. Actionable negligence consists in the neglect of the use of ordinary care or skill towards a person to whom the defendant owes the duty of observing ordinary care and skill, by which neglect the plaintiff has suffered injury to his person or property. ELEMENTS OF NEGLIGENCE CLAIMS The definition involves three constituents of negligence: (1) A legal duty to exercise due care on the part of the party complained of towards the party complaining the former’s conduct within the scope
The area of tort in law is also called negligence it is caused due to carelessness...In Legal position the idea of negligence should exercise reasonable when they act by taking account f that they might foreseeable cause harm to other
Civil law is when harm is one individual does harm to the other. Criminal law is when an individual harms society. In civil and criminal law, the plaintiff or prosecutor has the right of burden to prove their case. On the other hand, the person being sued or the defendant must show why they are not responsible. In civil law, a person will either be liable or not liable while a person in a criminal case would be found guilty or not guilty.
It would be ‘fair, just, and reasonable to impose a duty’ on Jenifer but, may open floodgates to similar claims. It can be concluded; a duty is established. Secondly, there must be a breach of duty, this is objectively assessed on the balance of probabilities. Firstly, in law how should the defendant have behaved in the circumstances? Secondly, in fact how did the defendant behave, and did there conduct fall below the reasonable standard of care
The failure to meet a standard of care or standard of conduct that is recognized by a profession reaches the level of malpractice when a client or patient is injured or damaged because of error.  Simply professional malpractice is breaching the duty of care by professional and it liable to happen injuries to the client. Obligation vs. Duty of
The requirements for an actionable misrepresentation are that; the misrepresentation must be a statement of existing fact or past events, and not a statement of opinion; it must induce a person to enter into the contract; it must be material in that it relates to a matter which would influence a reasonable person’s decision whether to enter into the contract. (Misrepresentation Act, Cap 390) There are three types of misrepresentation: The first is innocent misrepresentation - when the representor had reasonable grounds for believing that his or her false statement was true. The second is negligent misrepresentation - a representation made carelessly or without reasonable grounds for believing its truth. The third is fraudulent misrepresentation - where a false representation has been made knowingly, or without belief in its truth, or recklessly as to its truth. The affect of a finding of misrepresentation, regardless of whether it is innocent, negligent or fraudulent, is that the contract is voidable, and the innocent party may rescind the contract, which generally means terminating the contract and returning the parties to the position they were before the
However, many contracts between the general contractor and sub contractors include a payment clause that conditions the payment to a subcontractor upon payment to the general contractor by the owner. This trend tends to trickle down from general contractor to subcontractor and from subcontractor to sub-subcontractor (Enforcing Conditional Payment Clauses). Some courts have found that these clauses violate state lien statutes and public policy. In any case, it is important that subcontractors determine before signing a contract whether or not there is a pay-when-paid or a paid-if-paid clause in order to avoid any surprises. Especially since the surprise could come at the end of a job and once work has been completed.
In the circumstance of personal injury law, "assault and battery" is intended civil wrong that can make the base of a legal proceeding. In a usual case, the injured one of an assault and battery start legal action against the offender, trying to get settlement for injuries and further damages due to incident. What sort of performance adds up to "assault" in a personal injury claim, and what means