Compensation Act 2006 Essay -- Negligence

Negligence as a tort is defined as a faulting of a wakeless duty to take mete out which results in impairment to the claimant. It has been established that in order to raise liability and succeed in negligence claim, the claimant mustiness show that the defendant owes him a duty of care, that this duty has been breached, and that he suffered damage or loss which is within the scope of the duty. However, the question of whether a breach of a duty of care has occurred, involves two elements how much care is involve to be interpreted (in other words the standard of care) and whether that care has been taken. It is worthy mentioning that the standard of care in negligence is objective , as held in Nettleship v Watson , in which the conduct of the defendant was examined. The situation, however, was not that clear. Under Caparo turn out , the courts will take into account in determining duty of care foreseeability of harm, proximity, and whether imposing a duty would be fair, ju st, and reasonable. Relatively, it can be verbalize that s.1 of the Compensation Acts 2006, revolves around similar principles of those mentioned in Caparo test. In fact, the courts are invited low section 1 (but not obliged) to take into account the impact of decisions they keep back on standard of care. Furthermore, in deciding whether the defendant have taken necessary stairs to meet the standard of care, the courts are invited to examine whether those steps would prevent desirable activities from taking place, and discourage people from undertaking functions in connection with the activity. The question arises here, however, on whether Judges had such discretion forward the Act while deciding on standard of care. The answer lies in the explanatory notes of the Act, which declare... ...ckman 1990 2 ACMiller v. Jackson 1977 QB 966, CARobinson v Post Office 1974 1 WLR 1176Overseas Tankship (UK) Ltd v Miller steamship Co Pty, The Wagon Mound (No 2 ) 1967 1 AC 617Nettleship v Weston 1971 2 QB McHale v Watson 1966 CLR 199 Bolton v. Stone 1951 AC 850, HLDonoghue v Stevenson 1932 AC 562WebsiteEnd compensation culture Blair accessed seventh January 2011Compensation culture accessed seventh January 2011(Claire Mckenney), Questioning the claims culture (2004) accessed 7th January 2011Compensation Act 2006 Explanatory Notes accessed 7th January 2011