Common Law Assignment

Résumé du document

Bonjour,
Vous trouverez ci joint le cas pratique avec ses réponses.
Les réponses font entre 150 et 200 mots par question. L'anglais est du niveau B2-C1, elles contiennent bien la jurisprudences " Case Law".

Extraits

[...] Does the theme park owe any of these victims a duty of care and, if so, has there been a breach of this duty? Given the conclusions you have drawn in your answer to question who can successfully claim for psychiatric damage? Would they be primary or secondary victims? Set the scene, and state what the case is all about. James decided to give to his family the benefit of an offer proposed by the Supersensation Park by bringing his wife and daughter. Because of fear of the roller coaster, James decided not to do one of the attractions. [...]

[...] We can illustrate this through the Hillsborough tragedy in 1989, which resulted in many secondary victims. The House of Lords then enacted that a victim was said to be secondary if: - There is a close bond of love and affection with a primary victim, - They attended the event with their own senses, - They were in proximity of the event or its immediate consequences, - The psychiatric injury was caused by a shocking event. Following this logic, only James and Sheridan are secondary victims. [...]

[...] Bear in mind that this situation takes place in England. Therefore, pay attention to the fact that English case law only will be binding and UK statutory law only will apply. James discovers that the "Supersensation" theme park is offering a half price family deal and decides to take his wife Louise and daughter Hannah. As James is scared of rollercoasters, Louise takes Hannah for a ride on the rollercoaster. One of the park's employees, George, forgot to do a routine safety check before allowing passengers to board the rollercoaster, resulting in the carriage that Louise and Hannah were in crashing into another. [...]

[...] Sheridan, Louise's brother, also witnessed the televised scene and rushed to the hospital. As a result of these events, Louise suffered of serious head injuries. James, Hannah, Louise, Sheridan and George developed post-traumatic stress disorder. The purpose of this case is to determine how the justice system in the UK works using similar Law Cases in the past. Does the theme park owe any of these victims a duty ofecare and, if so, has there been a breach of this duty? [...]

[...] Secondary victims may also be entitled to a duty of care if they meet the criteria for being secondary victims. Even though George has suffered from post-traumatic stress disorder, he does not meet the conditions for being a secondary victim and therefore does not qualify for a duty of care will detail these conditions in the fourth question). Would they be primary or secondary victims? According to Lord Oliver in Alcock v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire, the primary victims are those involved in mediation or as participants. Following this logic, Louise and Hannah are primary victims. [...]