Placeholder Image

字幕列表 影片播放

  • now we'll talk about negligence

  • where an intentional tort is about someone doing something they weren't supposed to do

  • negligence usually happens when someone

  • doesn't do something they were supposed to do

  • there are 3 parts to a negligence case

  • duty breach and causation

  • first, duty... heh, "duty"

  • this is your duty not to expose other people to unreasonable risk of harm

  • the test for whether what you're doing is unreasonable is

  • whether a reasonable person in your situation would do the same thing

  • your situation include your basic physical attributes

  • but usually not your mental attributes

  • children are compared to other children except when they're doing something

  • usually only done by adults

  • so basically it's up to the court to decide reasonableness

  • they have to decide if what you did was too crazy or negligent

  • if they do, you've breached your duty if they don't, you're off the hook

  • they can take into account what you were doing and why when deciding whether or

  • not you were being reasonable and some actions are more reasonable than others

  • they can also take into account the way things are usually done to see if you

  • were just following the customary practice

  • sometimes you can make yourself seem more reasonable guy warning other people

  • of the danger involved with whatever you're doing

  • some warnings are a little more effective

  • while others won't do you much good

  • the court may not even have to decide whether what you did was reasonable

  • if it was also against the law

  • there's a rule called negligence per se that says if what you did was against

  • the law and you do it anyway and

  • you hurt someone you've automatically proven that you acted unreasonably

  • the one catch is that the law has to be designed to deal with something

  • reasonably close to harm you caused

  • so breaking a law against using guns in certain places and ending up shooting

  • someone would count because the law

  • was written to protect people from being shot

  • breaking a law against driving without your lights on at night and then your car

  • exploding would not count even if it hurt someone

  • because that's not the kind of thing the law was designed to deal with

  • incidentally a malpractice suit

  • where you sue a professional like a doctor or a lawyer for bad service

  • is in many ways just a fancy negligence case, the difference is in the duty

  • where an ordinary person just owes you the duty of acting reasonably

  • to keep you from being hurt

  • when you pay a professional they have the duty of doing at least as good a job

  • as a minimally qualified member of their profession

  • you'll note I said minimally qualified they don't have to be the best

  • they don't even have to be in the middle they just had to be good enough to be a

  • doctor even if that means they were the bottom of the class

  • so now on to breach

  • this part is really easy. if there was a duty did you break it?

  • did you put someone else an unreasonable risk of harm?

  • next is causation. did you breaching your duty cause harm?

  • it's always nice when you do something bad and it doesn't hurt anyone

  • but don't push your luck and just hope nothing bad happens

  • if you do breach a duty and something bad happens

  • the court will examine the facts

  • the test that usually applies is called the "but for" test

  • this just asks would the harm not have happened "but for" the person being sued

  • having breached their duty?

  • if they had kept their duty would the bad result have been avoided?

  • after all there are times you do something bad

  • but it's not the reason something bad happens

  • sometimes your negligence can even

  • put you on the hook for

  • someone else's negligence

  • if you put someone in an unreasonable risk of being harmed by someone else

  • you might both be sued even though you didn't directly hurt anyone

  • and there you have it

now we'll talk about negligence


單字即點即查 點擊單字可以查詢單字解釋

B1 中級 美國腔

17分鐘理解侵權法(第三部分 (Understand Tort Law in 17 Minutes (Part III))

  • 13 3
    Amy.Lin 發佈於 2021 年 01 月 14 日