Lord Macmillan has said that the categories of negligence are never closed, so that our actions must be non-negligent with respect to a potentially expanding range of interests. What are the advantages and disadvantages of this approach to tort law? Cases illustrating the expansion of liability for negligence include Donoghue v. Stevenson [1932] AC 562, City of Kamloops v. Nielsen [1984] 2 SCR 2, and Canada National Railway Co. v. Norsk Pacific Steamship Co. [1992] 1 SCR 1021
Friday, February 12, 2016
In a brief essay of about 750 words, please respond to the question below.
8:47 PM
In a brief essay of about 750 words, please respond to the question below. You may base your essay entirely on class lectures and the course textbook, but you may also do additional research if you wish. Please properly footnote all sources.
Lord Macmillan has said that the categories of negligence are never closed, so that our actions must be non-negligent with respect to a potentially expanding range of interests. What are the advantages and disadvantages of this approach to tort law? Cases illustrating the expansion of liability for negligence include Donoghue v. Stevenson [1932] AC 562, City of Kamloops v. Nielsen [1984] 2 SCR 2, and Canada National Railway Co. v. Norsk Pacific Steamship Co. [1992] 1 SCR 1021
Lord Macmillan has said that the categories of negligence are never closed, so that our actions must be non-negligent with respect to a potentially expanding range of interests. What are the advantages and disadvantages of this approach to tort law? Cases illustrating the expansion of liability for negligence include Donoghue v. Stevenson [1932] AC 562, City of Kamloops v. Nielsen [1984] 2 SCR 2, and Canada National Railway Co. v. Norsk Pacific Steamship Co. [1992] 1 SCR 1021
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Click Here To Order Now
0 comments:
Post a Comment