The Student Room Group

d d d d dd d d

d d d d d
(edited 10 months ago)
Reply 1
hold on, ill get back to u on this. I´ll attempt it myself then write back to u. I hope u dont mind the wait :smile:
(Original post by samixbokuto)hold on, ill get back to u on this. I´ll attempt it myself then write back to u. I hope u dont mind the wait :smile:

Original post by samixbokuto
hold on, ill get back to u on this. I´ll attempt it myself then write back to u. I hope u dont mind the wait :smile:

That would be awesome! I've got some ideas but just can't quite grasp it!
Reply 3
Hey! here are the potential tortious claims and liabilities for the parties involved in the car accident:

Daniela

Daniela could be liable for the death of Michaela and the injuries suffered by Angie. She was driving in excess of the speed limit in heavy fog, which was a negligent act. This negligence caused the car accident, which resulted in Michaela's death and Angie's injuries.

Daniela could also be liable for the medical malpractice she suffered at the hands of Kevin. Kevin was a medical professional who owed Daniela a duty of care. He breached that duty of care by prescribing the wrong anti-infection drug, which resulted in Daniela having to have skin grafts. Daniela could sue Kevin for medical malpractice.

Angie

Angie could sue Daniela for the injuries she suffered in the car accident. Daniela was negligent in driving in excess of the speed limit, which caused the car accident. This negligence resulted in Angie's injuries.

Angie could also sue Chris for medical malpractice. Chris was a medical professional who owed Angie a duty of care. He breached that duty of care by misdiagnosing Angie's arm injury. This misdiagnosis resulted in Angie's arm being broken and fused together wrongly, resulting in a permanent disability.

Michaela's Estate

Michaela's estate could sue Daniela for wrongful death. Daniela's negligence in driving in excess of the speed limit caused Michaela's death. This negligence entitles Michaela's estate to damages.

Michaela's Son

Michaela's son could sue Daniela for loss of consortium. Daniela's negligence in driving in excess of the speed limit caused Michaela's death. This negligence deprived Michaela's son of the companionship and support of his mother. This deprivation entitles Michaela's son to damages.
Original post by Syed100
Hey! here are the potential tortious claims and liabilities for the parties involved in the car accident:

Daniela

Daniela could be liable for the death of Michaela and the injuries suffered by Angie. She was driving in excess of the speed limit in heavy fog, which was a negligent act. This negligence caused the car accident, which resulted in Michaela's death and Angie's injuries.

Daniela could also be liable for the medical malpractice she suffered at the hands of Kevin. Kevin was a medical professional who owed Daniela a duty of care. He breached that duty of care by prescribing the wrong anti-infection drug, which resulted in Daniela having to have skin grafts. Daniela could sue Kevin for medical malpractice.

Angie

Angie could sue Daniela for the injuries she suffered in the car accident. Daniela was negligent in driving in excess of the speed limit, which caused the car accident. This negligence resulted in Angie's injuries.

Angie could also sue Chris for medical malpractice. Chris was a medical professional who owed Angie a duty of care. He breached that duty of care by misdiagnosing Angie's arm injury. This misdiagnosis resulted in Angie's arm being broken and fused together wrongly, resulting in a permanent disability.

Michaela's Estate

Michaela's estate could sue Daniela for wrongful death. Daniela's negligence in driving in excess of the speed limit caused Michaela's death. This negligence entitles Michaela's estate to damages.

Michaela's Son

Michaela's son could sue Daniela for loss of consortium. Daniela's negligence in driving in excess of the speed limit caused Michaela's death. This negligence deprived Michaela's son of the companionship and support of his mother. This deprivation entitles Michaela's son to damages.

Does Daniela having a 41% chance of recovery otherwise cause any issues? If it is on the balance of probabilities 41% would not suffice, right?

Thanks so much for the help!
Original post by Syed100
Hey! here are the potential tortious claims and liabilities for the parties involved in the car accident:

Daniela

Daniela could be liable for the death of Michaela and the injuries suffered by Angie. She was driving in excess of the speed limit in heavy fog, which was a negligent act. This negligence caused the car accident, which resulted in Michaela's death and Angie's injuries.

Daniela could also be liable for the medical malpractice she suffered at the hands of Kevin. Kevin was a medical professional who owed Daniela a duty of care. He breached that duty of care by prescribing the wrong anti-infection drug, which resulted in Daniela having to have skin grafts. Daniela could sue Kevin for medical malpractice.

Angie

Angie could sue Daniela for the injuries she suffered in the car accident. Daniela was negligent in driving in excess of the speed limit, which caused the car accident. This negligence resulted in Angie's injuries.

Angie could also sue Chris for medical malpractice. Chris was a medical professional who owed Angie a duty of care. He breached that duty of care by misdiagnosing Angie's arm injury. This misdiagnosis resulted in Angie's arm being broken and fused together wrongly, resulting in a permanent disability.

Michaela's Estate

Michaela's estate could sue Daniela for wrongful death. Daniela's negligence in driving in excess of the speed limit caused Michaela's death. This negligence entitles Michaela's estate to damages.

Michaela's Son

Michaela's son could sue Daniela for loss of consortium. Daniela's negligence in driving in excess of the speed limit caused Michaela's death. This negligence deprived Michaela's son of the companionship and support of his mother. This deprivation entitles Michaela's son to damages.


- And could Daniela be responsible for the medical negligence Angie suffered as 'but for' the accident she would not have suffered any injury?

Quick Reply