Negligence and Tort Law

LEGT 1710 Business and the law

Assignment 1: Preliminary Research Task

Under Section 5 of the Civil Liability Act 2002, ‘negligence’ refers to the failure of one party to exercise reasonable care and skill so to prevent the personal injury of another party (inclusive of pre-natal injury, impairment of a person’s physical or mental condition, and/or disease). In the lead case of Novakovic v Stekovic [2012] NSWCA 54, overheard by McColl JA (Justice of Appeals) within the New South Wales Court of Appeals, deals with an appeal of a duty of care case. In summation, Ms Novakovic slipped upon exiting Mr and Mrs Stekovics’ residence as a result of seeing the dog in the house. Ms Novakovic details her fear for dogs and argues that Mr and Mrs Stekovic did not exercise a duty of care for her safety and thus she fell and hurt herself.

The appellant, Ms Novakovic, is appealing the decision that was made in district court that determined that the appellants, Mr and Mrs Stekovic, were not responsible for negligent action that caused the appellant to fall and injure herself. In an appeals case, an appellant is one whom appeals a court decision, and therefore a respondent is one who is called upon to issue response to an appeal in a decision – rather than a plaintiff and defendant in a first instance decision case.

The law of contract and the law of tort have different purposes. A tort has been interpreted as an injury other than a breach of contract, which the law will redress with damages. Torts thus differ from contracts and as a result are addressed by different laws, general the Civil Liability Act 2002. The Civil Liability Act 2002 was introduced 20 March 2002 to make provision in relation to the recovery of damages for death or personal injury caused by the fault of a person; to amend the Legal Profession Act 1987 in relation to costs in civil claims; and for other purposes such as to promote the notion of personal responsibility. One of the most fundamental and...