Negligence Case Study Essay -- Law of Tort, Tort Law

Review the scenario below. Consider the jural principles influencing the likelihood of any self-made action against Steve in negligence. Daria and her lover, gobbler, were crossing the road on a commonplace crossing when Tom was hit and killed by a car existence negligently driven by Steve. The car missed Daria by inches. Since the concomitant Daria has had frequent nightmares and has been unable to return to work. nettle, a policeman patrolling the area, witnessed the incident and went to travail to help Tom, but quickly realised that Tom was already dead. This was incrusts first day back at work pursual six months recovering from psychiatric illness caused by the distressing constitution of his job. As a result of seeing Toms injuries Harry has now suffered a return of the psychiatric damage which now come outs permanent.Samira, a civilian worker in police traffic control, was watching a TV monitor which showed the road as the incident occurred. Samira recognised To m as her husband whom she had not seen since the day, six months before, when he had left her and gone to live with Daria. Samira had always believed that, one day, he would return to her. She has suffered post traumatic stress disorder since the incident.------------------------------------------------------------------------------------In our given scenario we are asked to discuss legal principles influencing the likelihood of any successful action against Steve in the grounds of negligence. Steves negligent driving caused a series of events that caused losses to the other pile presented in the scenario and they take actions against Steve in the grounds of negligence. At first we must(prenominal) understand what negligence is. The tort of negligence provides the potenti... ...rameters and all the aspects of the law that appear in our given scenario we can safely say that any strike that is being made by Toms representative by Daria and Samira on the grounds of negligence breach of duty of care and psychiatric injury would be successful and that even though Harry suffered psychiatric injury his claim wont be successful since he doesnt fulfill the necessary parameters in order to make a successful claim.BibliographyNeal Geach, Question & Answer tort Law, PearsonLaw of Tort, Module Handout.CasesFrances Quinn, Tort Law, Pearson, first edition, pp 34-35Caparo v Dickman (1990) 2 A.C. 605Page v Smith 1996 1 A.C. 155Bourhill v Young 1943 A.C. 92Alcock v Chief police constable of South Yorkshire 1992 1 A.C. 310Hinz v Berry 1970 1 All E.R. 1084 albumen v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police 1999 2 A.C.455