chapter 3, case 5 - Page 50 checklist box three things a...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–2. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Page 50, checklist box- three things a plaintiff must prove Duty of care- defendant must ask himself “would a normally intelligent and alert person – a reasonable person—have forseen that those actions would likely cause harm?” the duty will arise only where the defendant could reasonably have forseen a risk of harm to the plaintiff or to someone in the plaintiff’s position. Pg 50 Standard of care- the law places a general duty on every person to take reasonable care to avoid causing foreseeable injury to other persons and their property. The standard demanded is that of te ordinary reasonable person. Pg 51 Causation- the plaintiff must show that he has been injured as a result of the breach of duty of care. No matter how blameworthy a person’s conduct may have been, he will not be held liable for damage that he did not cause. Pg 52 It was foreseeable that without the repairs there was a strong likelihood of physical harm to person or property. Pg 55 Burden of proof- the plaintiff need only to establish that the defendant physically caused her injury. Pg 55 Contributory negligence- princess properties may have contributed to its own injury
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Image of page 2
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

This note was uploaded on 09/13/2011 for the course ADM 3360 taught by Professor Levasseur,sylvie during the Winter '09 term at University of Ottawa.

Page1 / 3

chapter 3, case 5 - Page 50 checklist box three things a...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 2. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online