It refers to a particular legal obligation where people are imposed with certain standards that they must follow with regard to ensure that their conduct does not harm the wellbeing of others. Negligent misstatement is one of the approaches of people, which is deemed to harm the wellbeing of others through providing misstated advices or information that eventually results in loss or damages of some kind for others. This can be comprehensively understood from the case of Hedley Byrne & Co Ltd v Heller & Partners Ltd (Baili, 1963).
According to an in-depth understanding of the case provided, it can be affirmed that the accident took place as Jones carelessly examined the process while resurfacing driveway of his premises. Moreover, he also overlooked adequate inspection processes regarding the incident of cutting electricity supply cable. The appropriate information about the cutting electric supply cable could enable Rashid to avoid severe injury, which may not further lead towards post-traumatic stress disorder type of syndromes.
In this regard, it can be stated that the careless act performed by Jones leading to impose severe physical harm to Rashid can be duly treated under a criminal ground. With reference to the provided case, it has become quite apparent that the duty of care was breached by Jones, who was accused of working in an irresponsible manner, resulting Rashid to face severe electric shock while examining the resurfacing area. Therefore, it can be affirmed that the incident breached the principle relating to ‘duty of care. ’ According to the fundamental principle of ‘duty of care’, the term tends to refer to the circumstance(s) and/or relationships that are recognised as providing legal duty towards ensuring effective care.
An infringement of such law can result in the defendant being accountable to pay the damages of the party or the injured individual because of breaching ‘duty of care. ’ In relation to the provided case, it is evident that the negligent act of Jones to his worker imposed major threat to Sally in terms of disrupting business of producing and selling ice cream to local restaurants and shops.
In this similar context, Sally has the rights to claim against Jones due to his negligent advice to Rashid, leading major lose to Sally in terms of effectively perform her business. (ii) Any Claim in Tort that Tom may have against Harry Jones In relation to the fundamental concept of ‘duty of care’, the parties or individual may be exposed to claim for the violation of the aforesaid concept with the intention of preventing varied sorts of economic losses.
Please type your essay title, choose your document type, enter your email and we send you essay samples