NEGLIGENT ACTS OR OMISSIONS
AbstractIn this article the author examines the role of negligence in the law of torts, and the problems associated with a failure to distinguish its role within fundamentally different fact situations. Specifically, the author discusses the English law of negligence and its failure to distinguish between cases in which a man creates a positive risk of harm to a foreseeable class of persons or property, and cases in which a man causes harm to another because he failed to take some affirmative action to protect that person from a dangerous existing set of affairs. In doing so, the author examines how the law has developed since Donoghue v. Stevenson and criticizes English courts for not drawing a clear distinction. He then focuses on the case of Haseldine v. Daw & Son, Ltd. and discusses how it may be used to illustrate such a distinction. In concluding his discussion, the author then looks at several Canadian cases in which the distinction has been drawn, and determines that many factors of policy based on various considerations will eventually clarify the role of negligence in England law.
Download data is not yet available.