Negligence Requirements and Potential Defenses to Myra’s Claim

Negligence Requirements and Potential Defenses to Myra’s Claim

            According to the laws governing negligence, an individual has a right to sue another individual for harm caused either by accident or by purpose due to negligence. The judges dealing with cases of harm due to negligence have to make a ruling based on the weight of the evidence brought forward by the parties involved. However, for a case against negligence to favor the complainant, the accused should have a duty associated with the said event leading to the incidence. If the accused has a duty, the next step in the case of negligence is the determination of whether the accused breached the terms specified according to the duties assigned. The case of Myra may not be backed by concrete evidence since CARDWARE and Candie do not have a duty to protect the judge from accidents that may happen on stage.

The first element that forms the basis of a negligence case is the determination of duty. The judge dealing a case involving negligence should first determine whether the accused has any duty assigned in regards to the complainant (Owen, 2006). The first type of duty that the accused could have is the ‘duty of care.’

The duty of care is an obligation to the accused to behave as a reasonable person while around the complainant. The behavior of the accused is compared to that of a reasonable person by determining whether a reasonable person would react the same way as the accused did, given a similar situation. When a judge feels convinced that the accused behaved as a reasonable person, the accused is said to have fulfilled the duty of care. In the case of Myra, the judge given the responsibility to handle the case should critically evaluate the circumstances around the accident scene and determine whether Candie and CARDWARE were responsible for any duty of care towards Myra. The other form of duty is a special duty, where the accused is required by a law or a statue to protect or perform some activities for the benefit of the complainant. The judge has a responsibility to review the relationship between the accused and the complainant to check for any duties.

After determining whether the accused had a duty towards the complainant, the next step is to identify any breach in the specifications of the said duties. The breach of duty involves behaving in a way other than the specified procedures of the duty requirements (Oviedo, 2016). After the breach has been identified, the other bit is to determine whether the breach is the cause of the harm reported by the complainant. The accused will not have a case to answer if the breach is not the cause of the harm. Also, the judge has a responsibility to ascertain whether harm occurred. The case should only be based on evident harm to the complainant.

The case of Myra presents loopholes that CARDWARE and Candie can utilize to win the case. For example, Candie has to showcase the fashion being presented by CARDWARE and not to protect the judge. The fact that Candie and CARDWARE have no duty to protect the judges, and have behaved reasonably, no duty has been breached. Also, the accident has been caused by a faulty carpet and not Candie. The responsibility of repairing the carpet does not lie in the hands of Candie and CARDWARE and thus Candie and CARDWARE could not have a case to answer.

In sum, a case of negligence should follow the right procedure to ensure that justice prevails. For an accused to have a case to answer, the accused should have a duty assigned to them for the benefit of the complainant. The accused should have breached the duty and caused the harm before a case is filed.

 

References

Owen, D. G. (2006). The five elements of negligence. Hofstra L. Rev., 35, 1671.

Oviedo, A. D. (2016). Use of jurisprudence to teach professional negligence. Journal of Nursing Education, 55(12), 720-720.