Arguments Of Negligence

2253 Words10 Pages
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.


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
…show more content…
The bottle in fact contained the decomposed body of the snail. The plaintiff consumed a part of the continents which were poured in tumbler. The bottle was a dark opaque. The glass sealed with metal cap so that its contents could not be ascertained by inspection. The plaintiff bought an action against the manufacturer of the beer to recover the damages which she suffered serious effects on her health by shock and sever gastro-enteritis. The plaintiff, claimed that it was defendant’s duty to have a system of work and inspection sufficient to prevent snails getting in to ginger beer…show more content…
Rescuse cases (Volenti non fit injuria)

• The defence of Volenti non fit injuria is inapplicable in the rescue cases

• If the plaintiff voluntarily takes a risk to rescue somebody from the danger created by the wrongful act of the defendant

• He will have tight to bring an action for damages against the defendant

• The Doctrine of assumption of risk does not apply where the plaintiff has under an emergency caused by the defendant’s wrongful misconduct, Consciously and deliberatively, Consciously and deliberatively faced a risk, even death to rescue another from imminent danger of personal injury.

Doctrine of res Ipsa Loquiter ( Things speaks for itself )

• It is the Rule of evidence

Condition of the for the Application maxim There are three requirements which must be satisfied for the application of the rule of res Ipsa loquitur

• Absence of explanation
• Improbability of the happening
• Management and control of the object in causing accident in the defendant 's hand

Essential requisites for the Application of the Doctrine
• The which causes the harm must be under control of the
Open Document