TORT Term Paper Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1250 words

TORT - Term root word ExampleThe Page case established foreseeability of personal injury, whether physical or injury, as a polar element in tort claims. It is a legal dictum applicable only to primary or direct victims. The Alcock case, on the other hand, dealt with secondary victims or claimants suffering from psychiatric injury by evidence of their exposure to the injury or death of a loved one. It established three control mechanisms face of close ties of love and affection between claimant and victim, albeit this is presumed in certain cases establishment of presence at the diagonal site or immediately after, and establishment of psychiatric injury as a result of promptly witnessing the accident or its immediate aftermath. In the present case, however, the police officers/rescuers were not claiming as secondary victims, haply witnessing their loved ones dying or being injured, but as primary victims suffering psychiatric injuries as a result of being in the rescue operation . ... The House of Lords was faced with the dilemma of granting claims to policemen/rescuers for psychiatric nausea when it had earlier, in Alcock, refused similar claims by close relatives of the victims. Moreover, the prospect of expanding claims on the ground of psychiatric illness comprise four issues the complication of drawing the line between serious grief and psychiatric illness the incumbrance on claimants suffering from psychiatric illnesses in the event of an expansion the floodgate doctrine where more classes of persons depart be suing on the ground of psychiatric illness, and a lopsided liability burden on suspects similitude tortious conduct. 4 On the basis of the above, the HL was persuaded to dismiss the claims of the police officers/rescuers, observing that where the law on psychiatric injury is concerned, the administration should stop provisionally at the boundaries established by the cases of Alcock and Page until and unless fan tan itself conducts a reva mp by enacting laws that would finally settle all pertinent issues. This, the Court observed, was the prudent affaire to do. Q2 Victor should institute an action for tort against William, for his broken legs and ribs, and against the hospital for mistakenly amputating his arm. William is liable for the broken legs and ribs of short Victor notwithstanding that the slow-speed collision was supposed to have only caused bruising. Under the eggshell skull rule, a defendant is liable in tort for the aggravation of a plaintiffs existing injury or condition, regardless of whether the magnitude of the injury was foreseeable. 5 Thus, in Smith v Leech Brain & Co,6 the Court granted the claim of the widow of a worker who died of cancer three years after a molten metal accidentally