Flashcards
Negligence
Cards in this deck (12)
- 1Professional Negligence:'Carelessness, doing something a reasonable person wouldn't have done, or not doing something a reasonable person would have.'
-it is a tort
-negligence protects against acts and omissions that infringe a recognised interest (physical, property and financial).
-not personal reputation, stress or dissapointment - 2Elements of Negligence:1) Duty of care,
2) Breach of Duty,
3) Damage
^all 3 elements must be proven - 31 Duty of Care:-does the defendant owe a duty of care?
- Pr professionals have a duty of care to their clients, pr agencies have a duty of care to their employers, everyone has a duty to take reasonable care to avoid a reasonably foreseeable risk of injury tp third parties - 4Scope of Duty of Care:-not enough to say that there is a duty of care, the contract will usually outline the scope of the work that the agency is being contracted to undertake therefore the scope of negligence mirrors theirs, it is dangerous to assume that the contract always limits the scope of duty, assume a duty always exists between you and clients/ those who rely on your advice
- 52 Breach of Duty:-did the defendant meet the level of care that was required, did their actions measure up against a reasonable persons', professionals are expected to have and exercise the skill and care that is to be expected of their fields
- 6Reasonable person:A PR practitioner will be judged by the standard of a reasonably competent and experienced pr practitioner in the relevant field even if the relevant practitioner was young and inexperienced
- 7Civil Liability Act 2002- a defendant is not liable in failing to take precautions against a risk of harm unless it is foreseeable, not insignificant and a reasonable person would have taken precautions.
-s5c determines that the defendant caused damage to the plaintiff, it is necessary to prove that it is appropriate to hold the defendant liable for the whole scope of the liability - 8What Would the Reasonable Person Do?A reasonable person must have been able to foresee the harm was possible as a result of the act/omission. Court must account for the probability of the harm occurring (s5B civil liability act), the likely seriousness of the harm, the burden of taking precautions, the social utility of the activity.
- 9Probability of Risk:If the foreseeable risk was not insignificant, how probable is it that ham would result from the risk? The more precautions will be needed in response, if the probability of harm is very small then it may be reasonable to do nothing.
- 10Burden of Precaution:Are precautions possible, would they be expensive, would they be practical? Consider the gravity of the harm, social utility--> the ends justified the means and helped society in some way. Meeting industry professional standards also does not mean you weren't negligent.
- 113 Damage:'Harm or injury.' Can be physical, psychiatric, property, economic, damages must have eventuated--> fault was a necessary condition of the occurrence of the harm (definitely the dependent's fault).
- 12Negligence and Pr:-legal duty to perform work with competence and skill
-breach of director's duty
-breach of contract
-breach of duty as an employee dismissal
-breach of code of ethics
-refrain from damaging comments to agency/client reputation
-avoid badly designed campaigns/mistakes in press releases
-incorrect advice
-inappropriate crisis management plan
-general incompetence
-disclosure of confidential information
-never admit liability when issuing apologies
Information
- Description
- Law Flashcards on Negligence, created by Carla Genovesi on 22/11/2017.
- Created by
- Carla Genovesi
- Views
- 0
- Rating