Student name: Niyazova Gyuzyal Student ID: 0286RTRT1011 Semester: BABS 2 Subject name: Legal & Management Principles

Lecturer : Mrs. Bahma Sivasubramaniam

Table of contents
1.0 Tort Law................................................................................................................................................... 3 1.1 Negligence ............................................................................................................................................... 3 2.0 Elements of negligence ........................................................................................................................... 4 2.1 Duty of care ............................................................................................................................................. 4 2.2 Breach of Duty ......................................................................................................................................... 4 2.3 Damage ................................................................................................................................................... 4 2.4 Causation ................................................................................................................................................. 5 2.5 Remoteness ............................................................................................................................................. 5 3.0 Manufacturers of negligence ................................................................................................................. 5 4.0 Professional negligence........................................................................................................................... 6 5.0 Invitation to Treat ................................................................................................................................... 6 References..................................................................................................................................................... 7

1.0 Tort Law

From French for "wrong"- tort or illegal act, either intended or casual from which the wound happens to another. Violations of legitimate rights include all cases of negligence just as intended delusions which result in harm. Therefore civil law - one of the largest areas of the law (along with the contract, real estate and criminal law) also leads to bigger trial on a civil case, than any other category. Some intended violations of legitimate rights can be also crimes, such as attack, the battery, illegal death, fraud, transformation (an euphemism for theft) both to abuse property and to create the basis for trial for losses the dissatisfied party. The slander, including the intended message of a harmful lie on other - either the press or transfer or orally- is violation of legitimate rights and used to be a crime also.

1.1 Negligence
The part of law that negligence faces is when an erroneous is not dedicated deliberately but results from casual events - a failure to take the suitable concern when the personality is in a condition where it can be sensibly predictable that their behavior could potentially do injury to others. In other words negligence arises when a person breaks its duty of care. Negligence can control not only the persons material and psychological health but also its possessions and assets. Negligence cases as a rule are ruined in that is known as bases from which the applicant has to create everyone, and everything to have applicable negligence support. The first of them - that the duty of care existed and that the duty was then in the broken reality. The following rudiments can concern, whether there was a damage directly from it, break and whether has to appreciate the suitable remedial act compensation to the applicant. Significantly therefore that danger of a wound another has to be predictable during imagined negligence not only with advantage of reflections about the past or the facts of the following actions. As soon as the case of negligence was recognized compensation sum that the applicant can be appreciated, will be often measured discretely according to the law on responsibility. (Michell, 2001-2013) There are many cases of negligence. The classic example is 1932 case of Donoqhue v. Stevenson. The facts stayed that a friend bought a bottle of ginger beer to Donoqhue. After drinking some beer she discovered that there was a snail inside. Donoqhue suffered an injury as a result of this. After that she commenced a claim against Stevenson who was a manufacturer of particular brand of beer. The claim succeeded and established a modern law of negligence. (Denham, 1983)

2.0 Elements of negligence 2.1 Duty of care

The law of negligence says that all of us have to show the reasonable care taken not to cause foreseeable damage to other people or their property. Care - the legal obligation to avoid to cause damage or where harm, 'the quite predictable. The duty - the obligation of one person to another, demands that the using reasonable care prevented a physical, mental or intellectual wound. Society considers a duty as a thread which connect people in one community. For example, the college has a duty to her students; the shop has a duty to clients, the owner of hotel has a duty to his guest, etc. Existing of the relations can make a positive duty to carry out usual care to protect other person to harm. The respondent isn't accused negligences even if he didn't act with meaning care if it didn't owe a duty to the claimant. This general definition of a duty can externally give unfair results. Good example - if the owner of property has a deep opening in its backyard without any barriers round an opening. It has to be responsible if his guest gets to that opening, but shouldn't be responsible if the criminal enters into a backyard at night and gets to that opening. It would be unfair to expect that the owner will give compensation to the criminal for the wound. Therefore, the law says that the owner has no duty to protect the violator from any harm. Besides courts developed some rules which limit a duty of the person of care of others, and they are sometimes strengthened or limited to the charter. (Adas, 2013)

2.2 Breach of Duty

The second element of negligence - non-performance of duties, this element mean preliminary existence of norm ought to evade from impressive untimely risk of harm to other person, often strangers, on the highway, on streets or everywhere where. Connected with this law on negligence developed, standard requirements for identify and estimate reasonable behavior in our overflowed world where casual collisions are inevitable. Besides, the law on negligence for understands that it turns to the standard such definition the reasonable reasonable person. It is bank, asks as such person would conduct himself in the actual situation in his prosecution or its own purposes to avoid to harm to others in process. The person, that act unreasonably without due care - breaks a care duty, and such behavior can be characterized as 'negligent'. For example, the company carelessly made the tire which had some defect and caused serious accident. No certain negligent action or inaction from the manufacturer was identified. The mistake in production was the main reason of a problem with goods. The company manufacturer couldn't explain how defect, probably, was caused except its negligence. (Law Group, 2010-2013)

2.3 Damage
If, allegedly, negligent leadership doesn't cause damage, it doesn't make the action reasons in violation of legitimate rights. The claimant in case of negligence has to show under the law the declared wound, usually in the form of injury to the person or property. After establishment of a duty and violation of that duty, in negligence surround due, show loss or a wound to recover. In

this situation will be corresponding to show some legal documents which prove your loss or a wound to recover. Loss can be proved by repair, medical accounts; income loss from the passed employment as the suffering, caused to the claimant the respondent. Loss or wound can change from a case to a case. It can be physical harm, there can be a damage of property of the claimant or probably some mental suffering which include emotional disaster. (Ponser, 2013)

2.4 Causation
Other element of negligence - causal conditionality. The actual causal conditionality procedure in which it is necessary to prove that the respondent 's of action led to losses on the claimant' s a name. Causal conditionality for this purpose provides to attorneys the central element of negligence which connects the respondent 's wrong to the claimant' s harm. Sometimes abstention from action as also believe, is action in itself. It can be again disputable for many reasons, but it is a fact in evidence, has to go hand in hand with other elements. In case of such action the respondent is considered responsible for the damage caused to the claimant. There are many examples of this action in the medical industry. (Collin, 2003-2013)

2.5 Remoteness
In certain cases the causal relationship can be proved which actually correct, but not in sequence with legal system which holds the true reasons actual, just as under the law correct, will lead to violation of other laws or instructions and ethics. In this case the alternative even was known, whether there was a proximity between two . For example, the person who put on a banana thin skin and fell, can't go and make the claim to the seller of bananas in the market for the fact that it didn't lift a banana skin. (A., 2013)

3.0 Manufacturers of negligence

Negligence also can appear when the person doesn't carry out the rule of caution which as a result can lead to material damage or physical damage. Human negligence can be shown in various fields of activity of the person. Besides, can occur in some corporations of manufacturing industry where mainly, people can get a physical injury of a body. Or the enterprise allows big negligence, dumping their waste in water or air. It leads to environmental pollution and believing to be tort. This problem causes criminal liability and considered under jurisdiction of Civil law. (Kidner, 1992) In 1961 in Great Britain there was a court on the occasion of the sea tankers "Car Maund". The oil tanker, arriving to seaport in Sydney, I started doing incorrectly oil unloading. On the mooring there were some welding works, but the worker allowed to continue welding work as there was no danger. When oil dumped, it poured out in water. The wind and waves bore oil to a place where workers were welding which caused huge fire to the mooring. It damaged the mooring much. However, the court decided that water pollution from the poured oil was predictable, and the company will pay for damage of pollution of water to the city of Sydney. But, fire couldn't be predicted, thus, the company isn't responsible for it. From this example clearly that the factory independently often allows negligence at their work and becomes civil criminals.

4.0 Professional negligence

Professional negligence - violation of a duty which includes care between professionals and their clients. Care duty - the general arrangement of the act where the client expects level of professionalism and the standards which are usually carried out by those to a professions. For example, the most widespread term for medical professional negligence - a medical error. For this case the patient expects that the doctor and his subordinates will adhere to standards which would prevent inappropriate harm and would disturb patients under his or her care. Negligence from the doctor, carrying out his duties as professional is an inattention which breaks a care duty that the patient inserted the doctor and will involve legal penalties. The lawyer can participate in legal abuse of official position if he not only develops doubtful legal strategy, but also and will make critical mistakes which aren't "the reasonable attorney", will make. In cases as it is the witness expert can be obliged to prove that the attorney was negligent and broke his duty of care with the client. Besides, any case where the client is based on the professional to execute their duties of care, can be a form of professional negligence if the professional made brazen violations of behavior. According to this definition, the professional who distributes bad consultations on investments as violation of the general duty of the care placed in financial consultants, client, is allocated with the right to losses. If unethical behavior of the professional of mental health and contrary to usual practice of that he was involved in abuse of official position. At last, builders and architects support a care duty to owners and tenants to guarantee that the building will be established according to governmental regulation and the general practice for construction of buildings also. (Emerson, 2009) Example of professional negligence following: The company of the applicant operated diving school and ordered to arrange their brokers their social insurance and responsibility for quality of products; their coverings were allegedly increased from 1 million to 2 million. After fatal cases along with the company the complaint of a wound was made to the property deads. Dispute appeared from the point of view of an insurance covering, and whether belongs additional, is exclusive to export of diving products in the United States. Materials were given both to brokers and insurers for violation of terms of the contract and negligence, and there was subsequently a threatened mortality after requirement settlement. (Kidner, 1992)

5.0 Invitation to Treat

The invitation to consider in the Contract law is a sign that the party is ready to receive the offer from other party for the purpose of the potential contract. In other words, it - "the offer to make the proposal". Sometimes, though these actions can be considered as the offer in themselves, and it is important to understand distinction because if the legal contractual offer is accepted the second party, the contract is already created, and it is impossible to agree about conditions of the original offer more without both parties' the agreement. For the best understanding of this problem we have to understand clearly that to create the contract there have to be at least four indicators which are the offer, acceptance, intention to create legal relationship and a reason. Even if one of these indicators is absent, the contract can't be created.

The main distinction between the offer and the invitation to consider - that the offer - the promise to make the contract on motionless conditions while the invitation to consider is way to show that someone is ready to receive offers. The most part of a prevailing situation when it 's difficult to draw the line between the offer and the invitation to consider advertizes. Advertizing resembles attempt to receive the offer more. Therefore according to the contract law advertizing - the invitation to consider. The proposal in this situation is made just in that time when the client suggests to pay for an advertized product. One more example of tricky situation when it is hard to see the difference is the auction. The item itself here is an offer and after it is displayed the auctioneer decides either to accept the offer or not. An example would be the Payne v. Cave case which was held in 1789. The defendant put up the highest price for the item, but changed his mind and withdrew it. Since he did that before the fall of the hammer, and therefore before the contract was made, so the judge decided that the defendant was not bound to purchase the item. (Collins, 1986)

References
A., P., 2013. Answers. [Online] Available at: http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_remoteness_of_damage [Accessed 4 April 2013]. Adas, 2013. Adas. [Online] Available at: https://www.adas.org.au/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=118&catid=46&Itemid=117 [Accessed 4 April 2013]. Collins, J. W., 1986. Business Law: Text and Cases. 1st ed. New York: John Wiley and Sons Ltd. . Collin, W., 2003-2013. WiseGeek. [Online] Available at: http://www.wisegeek.com/in-law-what-is-causation.htm [Accessed 4 April 2013]. Denham, P., 1983. A Modern Introduction to Law. London: Edward Arhold Ltd.. Emerson, R., 2009. Business Law. 5th ed. New York: Baran`s Educational Series, Inc. . Kidner, R., 1992. Casebook on Torts. 2nd ed. London: BlackstonePress Ltd.. Law Group, 2010-2013. Rottenstein Law Group LLP.. [Online] Available at: http://www.rotlaw.com/legal-library/what-is-breach-of-duty/ [Accessed 4 April 2013]. Michell, 2001-2013. Online Legal Media. [Online] Available at: http://www.lawyersandsettlements.com/lawsuit/negligence.html#.UV7Q91eUWcx [Accessed 3 April 2013].

Ponser, 2013. Amazone Inc.. [Online] Available at: http://www.thefreedictionary.com/damage [Accessed 4 April 2013].