Legal systems: Duty of Care and Negligence

Legal systems are critical to the functionality of any given society. In particular, issues of duty and responsibility are fundamental to address especially when one party causes harm or injury to another. In this respect, the concept of duty of care and its connection to negligence serve a key role in the society. Tort law provides for legal processes following acts of negligence that exhibit duty of care. The underlying liability in negligence, however, is limited because duty of care must be justified before the courts.
Acts of negligence could result in many different forms of harm or injury. Under the common law, acts of negligence could result in physical injury, psychological harm or economic loss. These outcomes equate to a given level of liability by the defendant to the claimant. In order to hold the defendant liable for negligence, however, the claimant has to meet the court’s threshold as far as justifying duty of care is concerned. Failure to evidence duty of care subsequently results in the collapse of the case.
Duty of care is a legal obligation that is highly influenced by the relationship between the defendant and the claimant. In other words, both parties must exhibit a given and acceptable form of relationship under the relevant legal provisions. The relationship between the defendant and the claimant forms the basis of the aforementioned legal obligation.
Legal provisions for negligence under tort law hold duty of care as the first and critical element that evidences negligence. Although there are two other elements in that regard, duty of care forms the primary basis of pursuing negligence cases. In this respect, the concept of duty of care is critical to the activities and operations of any court that deal...

... middle of paper ...

...occurrence of any loophole within the process of justifying negligence critically affects the case. Notably, areas that allow courts to limit liability in negligence fall within the established duty of care legal provisions.

Books
Dickson B, Human Rights and the United Kingdom Supreme Court (Oxford University Press, Oxford 2013)
Harpwood V, Modern Tort Law (Taylor & Francis, London 2008)
Steele J, Tort Law: Text, Cases, and Materials (Oxford University Press, Oxford 2010)
Cases
Caparo Industries plc. v Dickman [1990] UKHL
Donoghue v Stevenson [1932] UKHL 100
Holmes v Alfred McAlpine Homes (Yorkshire) Ltd [2006] EWHC 110 (QB); [2006] 3 Costs L.R. 466
Holt v Edge [2007] EWCA Civ 602; [2007] 97 B.M.L.R. 74 (CA (Civ Div))
Murphy v Brentwood District Council [1991] 1 AC 398
Slessor v Vetco Gray UK Ltd [2007] Rep. L.R. 83 (OH)
Thai Trading Co v Taylor [1998] Q.B. 781