Search results

June 28, 1972 Limitation of action — Asbestosis — Workman contracting insidious disease over number of years through employers' breach of statutory duty — Action commenced more than one year after giving up work — Lack of knowledge that disease attributable to breach of duty — Whether workman entitled to bring action outside period — Limitation Act 1963 (c.47) ss. 1(3), 7(3).

The purpose of this study is to determine the existing legal implications for medical negligence in India and recommending how open communication and empathy by the doctors can help prevent these implications.

This research is based on a qualitative method. Indian laws, Indian constitution, journal articles, books and other writings have been reviewed to develop this study.

There are many legal implications for medical negligence in India, and justice can be demanded under a number of Indian laws. This study also found that it is important to create awareness regarding the laws governing medical negligence through effective communication and empathy.

Extant literature discusses in detail the various laws related to medical negligence and few talk about creating awareness about these laws amongst people, and while some researchers understand the importance of sensitizing health professionals of the nitty-gritty of the legal implication governing medical negligence, none provides a framework of medical negligence with the help of sensitizing health professionals through communication. This study fills the gap by focusing on prevention than cure.

The aim of this paper is to determine the available remedies for medical negligence instances in Bangladesh.

This research work is qualitative in nature. Books, journal articles, case law and statutory laws have been reviewed to formulate this work.

A victim of medical negligence in Bangladesh can approach the court seeking remedy under the Criminal Law, Civil Law and Constitutional Law. Moreover, medical professionals are expected to be aware about the legal consequences of their medically negligent practices, and they should indulge in ethical practices so as to avoid getting embroiled in controversial situations and litigations.

The main reasons for unaccountability of medical practitioners include the unwillingness of people to initiate action against medical practitioners and the lack of legal knowledge about the remedies for medical negligence instances. This paper will assist in gather the required legal knowledge.

March 16, 1970 Negligence — Duty of care — Damage to electric cable by workmen building wall on road — Resulting power failure in near‐by factory — Damage to plant and machinery and loss of day's production in factory — Claim for damages by factory owner — Whether damage too remote — Liability of defendant — Whether actionable nuisance.

November 14, 1969 Contract — Construction — Supply of gas — Indemnity — Consumers to indemnify gas board against claims for injury or damage “caused by any action … of the consumers, their servants or agents whether arising directly or indirectly out of the supply of any gas or apparatus” — Escape of gas from faulty main — Explosion touched off by act of consumers' employee — Negligence — Board mainly liable v Whether entitled to be indemnified for own negligence.

One of the common law duties owed by the employer is his duty to take reasonable care for the safety of his employee. This common law duty is an implied term in the contract of employment and is therefore contractual in nature. Because of the difficulties which may arise in bringing an action in contract for breach of the employer's duty of care, the employee who has sustained injuries during the course of his employment (although he may sue either in contract of tort will normally bring a tort action.

Discusses the factors which have led to a proliferation of litigation in respect of professional negligence in the field of real estate. Outlines caveat emptor (or ′buyer beware′), fraud, negligent misrepresentation, negligence, innocent misrepresentation and strict liability and statutory liability for misrepresentation. Gives examples of specific cases. Suggests that both the residential market and the commercial sector have been affected to such an extent that it is no longer clear whether the decision‐makers take any responsibility for their actions, but rely solely upon the real estate profession to act as a guarantor of the transaction.

The Equal Pay Act 1970 (which came into operation on 29 December 1975) provides for an “equality clause” to be written into all contracts of employment. S.1(2) (a) of the 1970 Act (which has been amended by the Sex Discrimination Act 1975) provides:

April 18, 1972 Negligence — Contributory negligence — Damages — Apportionment — Plaintiffs minor contributory negligence — Whether to be disregarded — Law Reform (Contributory Negligence) Act, 1945 (8, 9 & 10 Geo. VI, c. 28) s. 1(1).

Many Australian educators believe that it is common in the USA for teachers to be sued by their students for careless teaching. Contends that this is a misconception, as the reported cases indicate that the US courts have been reluctant so far to find teachers liable at common law for careless teaching, or “educational malpractice”. The courts have justified this reluctance on “policy” grounds, arguing that to impose such a liability on teachers would not be in the public interest. However, in a recent decision in Britain, the House of Lords held that educators are under a duty of care when advising on the educational needs of students. Examines the following issues: the extent to which at present Australian teachers could be liable for loss suffered by students as a result of poor teaching; the House of Lords’ decision on educational negligence, the US courts’ policy reasons for refusing to hold teachers liable for poor teaching; whether the Australian courts should follow the US courts or the House of Lords; and the likelihood of Australian teachers being sued for educational malpractice in the near future.