Business Management Affairs Coursework Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 words

Business Management Affairs - Coursework Example95).This element was developed from decisions do by judges in various cases. A work of commission involves taking reasonable make out to prevent acts or omissions which are more likely to injure the involved parties. It requires a person to be prudent, cautious, attentive and careful when acting toward others. In other words, one should sate the standard of care in their actions to wards others.a. Foresee ability This is whether the consequences are somewhat foreseeable. For example in the case of Kent v Griffiths (2000) the damages was held to reasonably foreseeable. In Topp v London Country Bus Ltd (1993), there was no foresee ability.b. Proximity This involves the impropriety between parties which can be either physically or legal relationships. In the case of spot Office v Dorset Yatch Club (1970), it was held that there was proximity. There was no proximity in the case of Caporo v Dickman (1990).c. Fair, just and reasonable This determines whether it is fair, reasonable or just to apply duty of care. In the case of hill v C.C of W. Yorkshire (1988), it was held not to be fair, reasonable and just. However a duty of care was applied on the fire brigade in the case of Capital v Hampshire County Council (1997).Breach of duty is when the suspect fails to meet the expected standard as determined by the law. If the claimant proved that the defendant owed him a duty of care he should further show that the there was a breach of duty by the defendant. Breach of duty is determined by the degree of risk involved and the seriousness of the harm which can be measured objectively.Where the harm has several possible causes, the claimant should prove beyond reasonable doubt that the negligence of the defendant was the chief(prenominal) cause. This test is well demonstrated by the case of Wilsher v Essex AHA (1988).With a weakness of particular harm, the defendant will be held responsible as illustrated in the case of Smith v Leech