Negligence tort law - Negligence duty of care - Omissions, public authorities, vicarious liability

📝 Download my FREE guide on how to make exam notes in my ingenious style: https://julieschmidtlaw.com/b/l8Lic

🏆 I was top of this subject at law school and 13 others. My notes are incredible and I have already sold hundreds to law students.

➡️ Here's where you can purchase my notes for this subject: https://julieschmidtlaw.com/b/R1vdM

About the video:

We cover A LOT in this video (including case references!) about the duty of care in negligence, including: whether someone owes a duty of care to someone else for omitting to do something (rather than acting negligently); whether public authorities owe a duty of care to members of the public; whether an enployer or someone else can be vicariously liable for someone else's negligent act or omission, thus owing a duty of care to someone else; whether you can owe a duty of care for your words (negligent misstatement); and whether you can be owed a duty of care for suffering only economic loss, not physical damage.

IT'S A LOT! I hope you enjoy it :)

~ Check out Part 1 of this video about understanding the duty of care in general: http://bit.ly/DutyofCareEP1

~ Check out this related video on understanding the tort of negligence as a whole: http://bit.ly/tortofnegligence

Please note: this content is best suited for New Zealand law students. Many of the cases are English and are therefore applicable to other common law jurisdictions. But there are a few NZ only cases in here and interpretations.

Also note this disclaimer: Julie is not liable for any of the information given out on this channel. It is merely opinion and not intended to be relied on by anyone for any purpose.

0:00 Introduction
0:13 Does someone owe a duty of care for omissions?
0:59 Pure nonfeasance
1:22 Exception 1: Ownership of land Goldman v Hargrave 1967 1 AC 645 (UK)
1:40 Exception 2: Control
2:16 Do public authorities owe a duty of care to people?
3:08 Exception 1: Special relationship of proximity
4:31 No special relationship of proximity
4:38 Swinney v Chief Constable (1996) UK (CA)
6:38 Test 1 for vicarious liability: Nature of the relationship
7:22 Whether the wrongdoer's activities formed an integral part of the defendant's activities
7:27 Whether the defendant increased risk of wrongful behaviour by putting the wrongdoer in that situation
7:34 Whether the wrongdoer was under the control of the defendant
7:38 Whether the defendant is more likely and able to compensate the victim
7:44 Test 2: Sufficent connection
9:48 Negligent misstatement: does someone owe a duty of care for words?
10:57 Relied on for proper purpose
12:28 Does someone owe a duty of care for economic loss?

Видео Negligence tort law - Negligence duty of care - Omissions, public authorities, vicarious liability канала Julie Schmidt Law