o Similarities and differences VIP relates to wrongfulness paras 67 T686970 3

O similarities and differences vip relates to

This preview shows page 12 - 15 out of 25 pages.

o Similarities and differences VIP – relates to wrongfulness paras 67, T,68,69,70- 3 o How to apply criteria of wrongfulness
Image of page 12
o Normative framework of cost o Limiting factors to curb liability, o Policies and legal factors relevant to police, makes such claim impossible, - moral indignation bonis mores (changing) o Court – when parents don’t claim entitled medical expenses – should let the child claim or? May be a legal duty not to claim that loss, because sec 28 child’s right will be infringed, Can parents and child claim= no either or o Possible third? Could the child sue the parents? that she didn’t get an abortion – right to choose? o Special Relationship between doctor and child Critically discuss S99 of deeds registry act – mala fide? Exclusion of liability clauses – contractual undertaking for the safety of a third party. Contractual exclusions – Interplay of factors – o Not watertight - know cases for which factors will be taken into account o All relevant circumstances General wrongfulness Criteria – legal duty by omission =liability? . o Bonis mores of community, o Wrongful is all other elements of the delict are complied with 12 August Wrongfulness Reflection - Wrongfulness – the reasonableness of holding a person accountable, punishment? in the eyes of the community. Reasonable o Infringement of subjective rights. real, personality, personal, intellectual. Breach of legal duty to act or not, 56 para 3 , 57 bottom of text. o No general duty Telematrix - Crown chickens Wrongfulness – breach of statutory duty Justifications for wrongfulness Positivised bonis mores – allowed to act wrongfully Where apparent (prima facie) wrongfulness is rendered lawful/justified Of pa rights limited by ds exercise of his/her own rights – therefore Defendant acted within confines of his/her own rights Onus is on defendant to prove ground of justification o Private defence – yours or someone else’s – definitions 3
Image of page 13
Defendant directs his/her actions against another person actual or immediate threatening wrongful act in order to protect his or her own legitimate (legal recognised) interest or such interests of someone else in the process reasonably causes harm to the attacker If a person protects her/his own or another’s interests against a threatening ………………. …………………….. Private defence diagram o Attacked – actual or imminently threatening wrongful conduct. o Defender – protecting subjective rights, or legally recognised interest o 3 rd part – defender could be protecting 3 rd party Attack o Human conduct o Wrongful – before you can justify o Already commenced or immediately threatening, but no yet ceased (revenge) Not required – o Fault on part of aggressor o That attack be directed at defender. 14 August The ddefence At aggressor Necessary to protect right Not too harmful Values of interest – the question is factual Interests need no be similar in character, can redirect to goods for example.
Image of page 14
Image of page 15

You've reached the end of your free preview.

Want to read all 25 pages?

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

Stuck? We have tutors online 24/7 who can help you get unstuck.
A+ icon
Ask Expert Tutors You can ask You can ask You can ask (will expire )
Answers in as fast as 15 minutes