Browse by Stream
QnA
Home
QnA
Go To Your Study Dashboard

Get Answers to all your Questions

header-bg qa
  • Home
  • Law
  • Read the following passage carefully and answer the question Under the tort of negligence, there are four elements a plaintiff must establish to succeed in holding a defe

Read the following passage carefully and answer the question

Under the tort of negligence, there are four elements a plaintiff must establish to succeed in holding a defendant liable. The Court of Appeals of Georgia outlined the elements for a prima facie case of negligence in Johnson v. American National Red Cross as follows: "(1) a legal duty to conform to a standard of conduct; (2) a breach of this duty; (3) a causal connection between the conduct and the resulting injury; and (4) damage to the plaintiff." Under the first element, a legal duty to a standard of due care, the plaintiff must prove the defendant had a duty to conform to a standard of conduct for the protection of the plaintiff against an unreasonable risk of injury. The duty of care will be determined by the applicable standard of care, and several factors can heighten the standard of care depending upon the relationship between the parties, whether the plaintiff was foreseeable, the profession of the defendant, etc. For example, the Red Cross has a duty, when supplying blood donations to hospitals, to do its best to ensure blood supplied is not tainted with any transferable viruses or diseases, such as an undetectable rare strain of HIV. A breach of the duty of care occurs when the defendant's actions do not meet the required level of the applicable standard of care due to the plaintiff. Whether a breach of the duty of the applicable standard of care occurs is a question for the trier of fact. There are several ways a plaintiff demonstrates a breach of the duty of care; these include actions against the custom in an industry, violation of a statute or, in some cases, res ipsa loquitor. Res ipsa loquitor permits the mere fact that damages occurred, with some additional evidence presented by the plaintiff, to show, therefore, that a breach of the duty must have occurred. After demonstrating there was a duty, and it has been breached by the defendant's conduct, the plaintiff must prove his or her injuries were caused by such negligent conduct. To hold the defendant liable for such negligent conduct causing injuries, the plaintiff must prove actual cause and proximate cause.

To show actual cause, the plaintiff must prove that, but for the defendant's negligent conduct, which could be either the defendant's Act or omission to act if the situation or relationship required action by the defendant, the injuries or damages would not have occurred. The proximate cause of the injury is the legal causation aspect of this element which follows the chain of events from the negligent conduct to the damages.

Question

A constructed a dam on a river, however, due to unexpected heavy rainfall the dam broke which caused injury to the village people, Decide.

 

Option: 1

 A would be liable for negligence

 


Option: 2

The workers of the dam would be liable for negligence

 


Option: 3

The Construction material manufacturer would be liable for negligence

 


Option: 4

Nobody would be liable for negligence

 


Answers (1)

best_answer

 The Court, in the case of Nichols v. Marsland (1876), has held that a person cannot be held negligent in case of an injury caused due to an act of God, and in this scenario, the dam broke due to an unexpected act of God which was beyond the control of A. Therefore, he would not be liable for negligence.

Hence d) is the right answer.

 

Posted by

Gaurav

View full answer

Similar Questions

Trending Articles/News

anam-khan

Intend to complete CLAT UG hearing at earliest for results to be declared: Delhi HC
anam-khan

CLAT 2025 LIVE: Delhi High Court reserves UG verdict, PG hearing on April 21

Latest Question