nickoash95
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#1
Report Thread starter 2 years ago
#1
Hi, I am first-year law student doing my 2nd paper on Tort. Based on the below scenario I have found in a claim (Daryl suing Rick) that contributory negligence is not a factor, there is a duty of care and a breach of this duty, it was the breach that caused the injuries. although there is Daryl's medical condition he has zero negligence in the accident therefore voluntary assumption risk could not be used against him, have I missed anything or is there any defences Rick could use against Daryl's claim, ThanksScenario Daryl is a driver in ricks car, Rick is speeding on wet roads, approaches junction where a cyclist comes at speed around the corner, Rick slams brakes on crashing into a parked car causing Daryl to hit his head on the window (he was wearing his seatbelt), Daryl has a blood clot in the brain as a result of neck jerking, Daryl was taking anticoagulants prior to the accident. Experts say that had Rick has been doing the appropriate speed for the road/weather conditions he would have had sufficient time to stop and not crash. Daryl is seeking a claim against Rick.I have mentioned Donaghue, the Caparo test and but for test and omissions, negligence of tort etc.
0
reply
Puddles the Monkey
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#2
Report 2 years ago
#2
Hi - sorry you haven't had a response to this yet. I'm just going to bump the thread in the hope that someone sees this and can help
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

If you do not get the A-level grades you want this summer, what is your likely next step?

Take autumn exams (20)
40%
Take exams next summer (12)
24%
Change uni choice through clearing (13)
26%
Apply to uni next year instead (4)
8%
I'm not applying to university (1)
2%

Watched Threads

View All
Latest
My Feed