Law Of Torts 2 - Question Problem Type

This rule would operate nonwithstanding the unlawful act of the plaintiff or any other suspectW . Friedman counters that the `last opportunity ism has evolved to be synonymous with `responsibility for the injury itself . The doctrine novus actus internieniens is not likely to permit responsibility to shift from one defendant to another . Lord Neil maintains that ` .even if the defendant is shown to be careless .

the financial obligation allow only ensue if there is a causal link between the carelessness and the damageIn for Ben s estate to establish a claim in offensive shock they will confuse to demonstrate that he suffered from a recognizable psychiatric insure as a direct result of what he maxim in respect of the accident Lord Ackner said that nervous shock necessarily involved a `sudden grip by sight or sound of an horrifying impression Again the public policy considerations discussed in respect of the cases of Pitt and Aston will provide viable defences against any claims raised by Ben s estateIf Ben had a history of suicidal tendencies and this was known to the police , the imposition of a duty of care would remain the same . In mound v head word Constable of West Yorkshire Police (1988 ) 2 ALL ER 238 Lord Keith said of liability in respect of police officers that `in some instances the imposition of liability may lead to the exercise of a function universe carried on in a detrimentally defensive body of mind It is clear from this reasoning that the courts are reluctant to trim a duty of care in cases involving police officers unless remissness relates to the nature of police work . The same reasoning would reserve if Ben had suffered chronic depression and was taking medication for itBibliographyAlcock v Chief Constable of the South Yorkshire...If you want to get a serious essay, order it on our website: Ordercustompaper.com

If you want to get a full essay, wisit our page: write my paper