Proving Liabilities in Negligence

Res ipsa loquitur is the legal theory applied exclusively to cases involving?

• defective medical products

• intentional torts

• negligence

• respondent superior

Choose one of the criterias that must be established for the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur to apply in negligence

• The defendant failed to act as a reasonable person would

• The defendant must be able to control or manage the situation

• The defendant's employees are responsible for the harm

• The harm was a foreseeable result of the defendant's activities

Res ipsa loquitur can be applied in cases of negligence where the evidence od causation is inaccessible to the plaintiff

• True

• False

The effect of the application of res ipsa loquitur is?

• To put the burden wholly on the defendant to disprove negligence beyond reasonable doubt

• To ensure that the claimant wins his case

• To allow both parties to assume certain facts despite lack of proof

• The legal burden of proof remains with the claimant

A legal theory that imposes liability on those who are engaged in ultrahazardous activity is known as?

• gross negligence

• strict liability

• intentional torts

• contractual liability

These are the four matters the claimant must show to establish the rule in Rylands v Fletcher, EXCEPT:

• The defendant did not act as the reasonable person would

• A dangerous thing escaped the land due to non-natural use

• The defendant is the occupier of the land

• Reasonably foreseeable damage was caused

• The defendant used his land in a non-natural way

The defendant must demonstrate THIS to establish contributory negligence; choose the correct statement with regards to contributory negligence

• The claimant breached a duty of care owed to the defendant

• A third party negligently contributed to the occurrence of the damage or its extent

• The claimant acted in a reasonable manner

• The claimant's lack of care contributed to the occurance of the damage or its extent

Sarah fell from a rambutan tree and went to an emergency room for treatment. Her diagnosis was a compound fracture of the left arm. She was taken to surgery. The fracture was set, and while under anesthesia, her arm was placed in a cast. After being discharged from the hospital, she followed all directions given by the treating physician. After six weeks the cat was removed and it was obvious that the arm was grossly deformed. Sarah's best option would be to file an action using which theory?

• strict liability

• negligence

• negligence with res ipsa loquitur

• intentional torts

If the defendant wants to plead the defence of volenti non fit injuria, he must prove the following, EXCEPT:

• the claimant has made a complaint about the risk

• the claimant knows about the risk

• the claimant consents to the risk

• the claimant is fully aware of the risk

Choose the FALSE statement with regards to general defences in torts:

• An act of God, may be defined as an extraordinary occurrence or circumstance which could not have been foreseen but could have been guarded against

• The defence of inevitable accident refers to an accident not avoidable by any such precautions as a reasonable man, doing such an act then and there, could be expected to take

• For a defence of necessity to be applicable, a great danger must be imminent, or that the act was done in order to save lives

• Statute may absolve defendant's liability subject to certain requirements that may differ from one statute to another, from one matter to another