You must have Credits on your Balance to download this sample
Pages 6 (1506 words)
For the elderly or disabled coach party member, his injuries were caused by the unsafe pathway. As a matter of fact, even if the pathway was made safe already, it would still have been the duty and responsibility of Rareplants Ltd. to have provided safety escorts or ushers to assist the clients in seemingly hazardous areas of the centre.
About the mother who suffered distress, anxiety and nervous shock resultant of the straying of the children onto an unfinished landscaping project, the direct link or chain of causation element is likewise in attendance. However, the emotional impact may not be fully appreciated by the court as it could possibly be an unusual and unnatural over-reaction. Again, this can be a mitigating circumstance.
d-2. Remoteness of damage. It is an element where the damage or loss must be determined as the proximate result of the negligence or quasi-delict. In the elderly/disabled customer, this cannot be made a consideration as the slippage was in truth and in fact the direct result of the unsafe pathway or of the lack of personnel in the center to have provided assistance along the passage. However, for the mother who was shocked, this may be a consideration, but one of mitigation. Why Because if her having been annoyed or distressed or disturbed is in such a level as will render a judgment from an unbiased mind that it is too much more than an ordinary or usual reaction from a human emotion. It is like saying that it is a remote possibility that the shock which the mother experienced would be in that proportion as to become one of a nervous wreckage.
d-3. Foreseeability. ...
Not exactly what you need?