Law in Practice UK Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 3000 words

Law in Practice UK - Essay Example Mr. David Balls, aged 41, has mentioned that he is married to Edwina Balls, 32 years of age. This couple has been married for a total of 8 years. On Valentine’s Day of 2011 (February 14th, to be exact), Edwina did not return home. A man named Harry Williams phoned Mr. Balls and informed him that he and Edwina had been having an affair for the past three months, and, in fact, she was asleep in his bed right now. David found out where Mr. Williams was calling from and he rushed out of his home to go to Harry’s house to confront him. David was driving from his home along Romford road and through the traffic lights (East) at Manor Park junction towards Ilford where Harry lives. At that moment, another driver came from the right and smashed into the driver’s side (offside) of his car. The police and the ambulance were alerted to the scene. David sustained bad bruising to his right leg but otherwise was unhurt. The other driver, however, had been thrown through her windscreen onto her own bonnet, and then onto the ground. The other driver—Katherine Buckingham, age 31 years old—sustained whiplash, a broken nose, concussion, and a badly bruised shoulder. Katherine also sustained cuts on her face and arms from the windscreen. Police officers told David that Katherine had not been wearing a seatbelt. Both drivers were breathalysed but neither was over the alcohol limit for driving. Everyone owes a duty of care to those affected by his or her actions and is liable in law for his or her negligence. Tort is the law that relates to civil wrongs, and in particular the laws relating to negligence. Personal injury is a particular form of negligence which can be brought to the courts on the part of the plaintiff. Mr. Balls does have a case for suing Ms. Buckingham, because personal injury consists of doing damage to s omeone’s person. However, Katherine may have a case when it comes to Mr. Balls running into her on the road, since what he did could be considered driving recklessly in a fit of passion—similar to how second-degree murder is not premeditated but is a crime of passion. Katherine might not be liable for David’s wrongdoing here, although she could be given a fine for not having worn her seatbelt. Here, the law of tort, negligence, and duty of care will be sufficiently explained. II. Law of Tort ‘Tort’ is the French word for a wrong. Torts are civil wrongs. Civil wrongs can be contrasted to criminal acts although one action might result in a potential liability for two claims, one civil and one criminal. If D runs into P on the road, D is liable to be prosecuted for civil sanctions such as fines, community penalties or imprisonment, which might be applied by the civil courts. But P can also sue D in the civil courts for any damages for the injury and lo ss that has been suffered. Negligence is a tort. III. Negligence, Liability for Negligence, and Defences Against Negligence The case of â€Å"Donoghue –v- Stephenson† (2011), set out the basic principles of negligence in English law (pp. 1). The case concerned food poisoning suffered by Mrs Donoghue whose bottled ginger beer was contaminated with the remains of a decomposed snail. As Mrs Donoghue didn’t buy the ginger beer (her friend did) she had no action in contract law (so she wasn’t a party to that contract). The case decided that, in English Law there must be and is a general conception of relations giving rise to a duty of care. The liability for negligence is based upon a general public sentiment of wrongdoing for which the offender pays. The case created the concept of negligence as an action in civil law allowing injured parties to sue wrongdoers for their loss and damage. To find a defendant liable for

Research Foundational Theorists Paper Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 750 words

Foundational Theorists - Research Paper Example He is the main foundational theorist without question—even if some of his ideas today seem somewhat controversial and difficult to agree with. The great Austrian psychologist Sigmund Freund was very influential. He came from the psychoanalytical school (which he founded). He worked hard to deconstruct what up until that point had been considered the unitary personality or identity of individuals. Freud’s emphasis on subjectivity, the unconscious, and perspective powerfully effected artists and writers of the period. Theorists in the psychoanalytic school frequently believed that people had a fractured identity, creating a multiplicity of perspectives and views on the world, none of which was especially better than the other. In a way this is a legacy of Freud’s ideas about subjectivity. A somewhat contrary psychological school is Behaviouralism and its founding theorist was B.F. Skinner. This idea holds that psychologists who talk too much about philosophical issues lose sight of what science can prove. Skinner wanted to focus on observable data rather than people’s secret thoughts about things. These theorists that people acted in certain ways because they were conditioned to do so and had less free will than believed. A good example of a behaviourist experiment involves Pavlov’s dogs—these were dogs that were trained to salivate at the sound of a ringing bell. A third important school of psychology is Humanism. These theorists, led by Abraham Maslow, didn’t like what they saw in the literary, over philosophical aspect of psychoanalysis or in the rigid scientific way of doing things in behavioualism. They wanted to take a more common sense approach and look at what things were important to people. They showed that there were many different needs people had, and that if these needs were met, then people would be happy. A fourth school of psychology that could be said to precede all of the theories above