3mmz
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#1
Report Thread starter 8 months ago
#1
Hey all

I have an Tort Law coming up in the next couple of weeks as I missed the May Exam due to illness

I am doing some past papers and just wanted to make sure I am on the right track....

The question I am doing is (summarising)


Dave and Jason are colleagues who work for Thomas Position Limited. The company supplies erects scaffolding for business projects. Dave and Jason are employed to erect and dismantled the scaffolding.

The company provided workers with helmets and training on the importance of wearing a helmet but Dave choose not to wear the helmet whilst doing his job.
Dave and Jason were trained on how to both erect and dismantle the scaffolding. However they found a quicker way to dismantle the scaffolding (Jason would drop pieces of scaffholding down to Dave) which the company did not teach them.

One day Dave is injured when he gets distracted by his friend Sarah arriving on site to take him to lunch and did not notice Jason dropping a large pole down to him, It struck him on the head and caused serious injuries....

1 Does Dave have any claim in Tort against Jason?

2. Does Dave have any claim in Tort against Thomas Limited?

Question 1 would you answer yes and link to negligence principle?

Question 2 - No because the company provided him with sufficient training and safety uniform
0
reply
james_law
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#2
Report 8 months ago
#2
While in essence your answers may be correct, academic law is not really about a right and wrong answer, its about how you get to that particular answer.
0
reply
3mmz
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#3
Report Thread starter 8 months ago
#3
(Original post by james_law)
While in essence your answers may be correct, academic law is not really about a right and wrong answer, its about how you get to that particular answer.
Hmm thats true

What you say to the above qus?
Just want to make sure I am on the right track hence why I am even doing the past paper as Tort is one of my weakest law topics.
0
reply
james_law
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#4
Report 8 months ago
#4
Post how you got to them answers and we can help you.
0
reply
3mmz
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#5
Report Thread starter 8 months ago
#5
(Original post by james_law)
Post how you got to them answers and we can help you.
I am a bit confused with the 2nd question.

I thought that yes he could make a claim in Tort against Thomas Limited because Jason is an employee and his negligent behaviour led to Dave's injury but on the other hand I was thinking that they provided both employees with training therefore they are absorbed from any claim?
0
reply
james_law
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#6
Report 8 months ago
#6
You need to discuss so much more than this, use what you have learnt in tort law. Is there a duty, is there a breach, is there causation.
(Original post by 3mmz)
I am a bit confused with the 2nd question.

I thought that yes he could make a claim in Tort against Thomas Limited because Jason is an employee and his negligent behaviour led to Dave's injury but on the other hand I was thinking that they provided both employees with training therefore they are absorbed from any claim?
0
reply
3mmz
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#7
Report Thread starter 8 months ago
#7
(Original post by james_law)
You need to discuss so much more than this, use what you have learnt in tort law. Is there a duty, is there a breach, is there causation.
But doesn't this question want you to discuss employers liability? So you talk about Lord Wrights employer common law duty - competent staff, adequate material, proper system of work and supervision or am I going down the wrong path?

Like I said I am really weak with Tort.
Last edited by 3mmz; 8 months ago
0
reply
james_law
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#8
Report 8 months ago
#8
Its about vicarious liability. You will have been taught everything you need to answer the question.
0
reply
3mmz
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#9
Report Thread starter 8 months ago
#9
(Original post by james_law)
Its about vicarious liability. You will have been taught everything you need to answer the question.
That is why I was asking for help lol
You seem to be upset about me asking these questions but I thought this is what the forum was for?
0
reply
ml55
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#10
Report 8 months ago
#10
I don't do law but i thought it was "taught" this whole time and my mind has been blown
0
reply
james_law
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#11
Report 8 months ago
#11
Not sure why you think i'm upset. Go over your notes, pick out the relevant parts, discuss and apply to the facts of the scenario then conclude.
(Original post by 3mmz)
That is why I was asking for help lol
You seem to be upset about me asking these questions but I thought this is what the forum was for?
0
reply
3mmz
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#12
Report Thread starter 8 months ago
#12
(Original post by james_law)
Not sure why you think i'm upset. Go over your notes, pick out the relevant parts, discuss and apply to the facts of the scenario then conclude.
Fair enough
0
reply
3mmz
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#13
Report Thread starter 8 months ago
#13
(Original post by james_law)
Not sure why you think i'm upset. Go over your notes, pick out the relevant parts, discuss and apply to the facts of the scenario then conclude.
I think I am done and have answered them pretty in depth.

Just adding another question that I found on another past paper - if for example the scenario I gave above - Sarah wants to make a claim having suffered from flashbacks and nightmares (recieving treatment from her doctor) from what she witnessed, would she be able to make a claim or is that only possible for physical injuries?
0
reply
james_law
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#14
Report 8 months ago
#14
(Original post by 3mmz)
I think I am done and have answered them pretty in depth.

Just adding another question that I found on another past paper - if for example the scenario I gave above - Sarah wants to make a claim having suffered from flashbacks and nightmares (recieving treatment from her doctor) from what she witnessed, would she be able to make a claim or is that only possible for physical injuries?
You need to discuss psychiatric injury and whether she is a primary or secondary victim. Again not in condescending way, you will definitely have been taught this, so pick out the relevant parts/cases etc, discuss, apply to facts and conclude.
0
reply
Notoriety
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#15
Report 8 months ago
#15
(Original post by 3mmz)
That is why I was asking for help lol
You seem to be upset about me asking these questions but I thought this is what the forum was for?
Really, people will respond if you're asking something actually complicated and something you might struggle to understand without assistance.

Basic tort principles can be easily found in lectures, never mind textbooks and whatever else you have access to. If you read the stickied post, it explains the level of depth you are expected to explain your issue in and how you are supposed to present it. E.g. point to cases, particular quotes contained in judgments and academic commentary, particular phrases used. Some stuff more specific than "explain to me basic principles of psych injury and vicarious liability".

When people ask complicated questions, I usually always help. I get to learn something new and have a eureka moment. This stuff is just boring.
Last edited by Notoriety; 8 months ago
0
reply
3mmz
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#16
Report Thread starter 8 months ago
#16
(Original post by Notoriety)
Really, people will respond if you're asking something actually complicated and something you might struggle to understand without assistance.

Basic tort principles can be easily found in lectures, never mind textbooks and whatever else you have access to. If you read the stickied post, it explains the level of depth you are expected to explain your issue in and how you are supposed to present it. E.g. point to cases, particular quotes contained in judgments and academic commentary, particular phrases used. Some stuff more specific than "explain to me basic principles of psych injury and vicarious liability".

When people ask complicated questions, I usually always help. I get to learn something new and have a eureka moment. This stuff is just boring.
Fair enough but I don't see what's the point of commenting if you find this stuff so easy and you don't want to help
There might as well be a rule then that you can only post hard questions on here if you are so offended smh.
0
reply
Notoriety
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#17
Report 8 months ago
#17
(Original post by 3mmz)
Fair enough but I don't see what's the point of commenting if you find this stuff so easy and you don't want to help
There might as well be a rule then that you can only post hard questions on here if you are so offended smh.
I was just explaining why people are continually disappointed when they post questions. It really comes down to the question being found in your textbook easily.

If you look at the sticky, it tells you to set out which books and other things you've already checked and found no answer, as to eliminate them from the answerer's investigations. With a simple problem, you'd have already found the answer in these books and therefore these simple questions are practically impossible to comply with the rules as set out in the sticky.

So people should just stop posting simple stuff and should, as James said, just check their textbook and notes. It is not one for us.
0
reply
3mmz
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#18
Report Thread starter 8 months ago
#18
(Original post by Notoriety)
I was just explaining why people are continually disappointed when they post questions. It really comes down to the question being found in your textbook easily.

If you look at the sticky, it tells you to set out which books and other things you've already checked and found no answer, as to eliminate them from the answerer's investigations. With a simple problem, you'd have already found the answer in these books and therefore these simple questions are practically impossible to comply with the rules as set out in the sticky.

So people should just stop posting simple stuff and should, as James said, just check their textbook and notes. It is not one for us.
Whilst I get you, I don't think there is anything wrong with asking for help even If it is simple. I did read my books and notes. Some topics are just tricky that when you have read it you may have slipped by somewhere or the its one of those topics that are open for interpretation. Thats why I wanted to know if I was on the right track.
0
reply
3mmz
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#19
Report Thread starter 8 months ago
#19
Anyways I have completed the practice paper and applied everything I know and went through all my notes.

Me and my fiends are conflicted about the 1st question though. She thinks Dave has no claim in tort but I say he does because duty, breach of duty and factual causation he acted negligently. Who is right?
0
reply
xxvine
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#20
Report 8 months ago
#20
(Original post by Notoriety)
Really, people will respond if you're asking something actually complicated and something you might struggle to understand without assistance.

Basic tort principles can be easily found in lectures, never mind textbooks and whatever else you have access to. If you read the stickied post, it explains the level of depth you are expected to explain your issue in and how you are supposed to present it. E.g. point to cases, particular quotes contained in judgments and academic commentary, particular phrases used. Some stuff more specific than "explain to me basic principles of psych injury and vicarious liability".

When people ask complicated questions, I usually always help. I get to learn something new and have a eureka moment. This stuff is just boring.
I agree with you actually. Some of the questions that do get asked are fairly straight forward and it seems some people are just being lazy.

However trying to help the poster out for his or her question, I did Tort last year so I have forgotten a lot but would you not say that Dave has no claim in tort because both committed acts of negligence. Since you are the law Wizkid I won't take my answer as being absolutely correct.
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

Regarding Ofqual's most recent update, do you think you will be given a fair grade this summer?

Yes (254)
34%
No (493)
66%

Watched Threads

View All