xxvine
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#1
Report Thread starter 1 year ago
#1
Hey all

I am going into my 2nd year of my Law degree and one of the modules we are learning is Tort this year.
My uni has given us some reading to do over the summer and questions to answer...

I am stuck on how to answer One of the 6 questions despite having done all the reading.

Having read the previous threads and reading some replies complain that too many people who are asking for help are asking easy questions and questions they should know I am not sure if anybody will bother helping me but I will see anyway.


Explain what a claimant needs to prove to show that a defendant owes him or her a duty of care in a stress at work.

Any help will be appreciated!
0
reply
Notoriety
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#2
Report 1 year ago
#2
Guidance for posting, as contained in the sticky:

The users who try to help you really do want to help! When you post your question it is really useful if you:

1. Include the points or full answer you have already written to the question

2. If needed, the entire question

3. A list of statute and common law you have used if not already in your answer

4. Pick the correct label when posting (A-Level, Undergraduate etc)

5. Quote each other if you definitely want a reply, otherwise :iiam:
Basically 1 and 3 need to be paid attention to.

What have you found out thus far. Where have you looked. What are the cases.
0
reply
xxvine
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#3
Report Thread starter 1 year ago
#3
(Original post by Notoriety)
Guidance for posting, as contained in the sticky:



Basically 1 and 3 need to be paid attention to.

What have you found out thus far. Where have you looked. What are the cases.
The wording of the qu has kinda thrown me off so I don't even know what direction to go - which is why I asked for help.
The qu states 'stress at work' so is it wise to say the claimant has to prove that the defendent did not show any care despite suffering from psychiatric illness?
0
reply
username3689312
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#4
Report 1 year ago
#4
Your question makes no sense....
0
reply
xxvine
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#5
Report Thread starter 1 year ago
#5
(Original post by james_law)
Your question makes no sense....
Sorry I have the updated question,

Consider a stress at work claim.
Discuss and evaluate whether the law is fair to defendant employers.

Is that question linked to vicarious liability. How would you go about answering for and against points?
0
reply
username3689312
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#6
Report 1 year ago
#6
If the person is employee is claiming from
The employer then it’s nothing to do with vicarious liability. I don’t have any experience with stress at work claims and doubt anyone on here does. It is a very narrow topic . If this an academic question you should have a been given at least a basic understanding of the topic.
0
reply
xxvine
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#7
Report Thread starter 1 year ago
#7
(Original post by james_law)
If the person is employee is claiming from
The employer then it’s nothing to do with vicarious liability. I don’t have any experience with stress at work claims and doubt anyone on here does. It is a very narrow topic . If this an academic question you should have a been given at least a basic understanding of the topic.
Nope the question is a general question
Is the Law (duty, breach, and causation of damage) fair to defendant employers. I am just confused how to approach it, like what for and against points to include.
0
reply
username3689312
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#8
Report 1 year ago
#8
You’re confusing! You just said the question is about stress at work claims, now it’s just general. I’d be confused on how to approach it if I couldn’t my mind up what the question was!
0
reply
xxvine
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#9
Report Thread starter 1 year ago
#9
(Original post by james_law)
You’re confusing! You just said the question is about stress at work claims, now it’s just general. I’d be confused on how to approach it if I couldn’t my mind up what the question was!
Sorry my bad
its because I emailed a teacher who sent me the question again.

The question is - Discuss and evaluate whether the law (duty, breach, and causation of damage) is fair to defendant employers.

I wanted help with a for and against argument that will get me started.
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

Has your university communicated any last minute changes?

Yes, and they were what I was expecting (0)
0%
Yes, and they were not what I was hoping for (1)
25%
Yes, and they don't change my view on attending uni (0)
0%
No, I haven't received any communication (3)
75%

Watched Threads

View All