Tort scenario Case Study Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1500 words

Tort scenario - Case Study Example According to the Police Act of 1996, an off-duty police officer can exercise their powers if the situation dictates it, and thus places himself back on duty. This was the case when PC Yaro say Bully commit the crime and subsequently chased after him. So it is clear that PC Yaro did have the right to arrest bully under #1, so we can now move to number #2. If Bully had not resisted arrest in any way, then PC Yaro would not have been within his legal rights to simply punch Bully. However, as PC Yaro attempted to arrest Bully (having gone through the normal procedure), he was then kicked on the shin by the suspect. Even if Yaro were not a police officer attempting to complete a justified arrest, he would have the right to defend himself. He has just witnessed Bully committing a violent act against an old lady, and thus has the expectation of further violence from Bully. What tort might Bully accuse PC Yaro of The basic tort would be that of assault, which includes deliberate violence against another person (Van Gerven, 2001). What defenses would Yaro have First of all, police officers have a general power to use force for the purpose of effecting a lawful arrest, Second, there is the concept of self-defense. In this case, Yaro would need to prove that the use of force was necessary and that the degree of force was reasonable. It is clear that the defenses to this tort would outweig... It is clear that the defenses to this tort would outweigh any arguments that Bully might have. Indeed, it seems clear that Bully would probably be convicted of the criminal offense of assault on a police officer (see Forbes, 1865). There is no tortuous liability for PC Yaro in this situation. The Case of Jim and Elsie/Mother - Nervous Shock and Economic Loss Most tort law depends upon the consideration and finding of the duty of care owed by one person towards another. Nervous shock tends to involve a serious psychological effect upon the injured party (see Alcock, 1992) As a heavy goods vehicle driver, Jim owes a duty of care to other road users to perform his job in a responsible and careful manner. He is a professional driver and needs to act as such. If Jim had been talking on his mobile phone with his girlfriend and crashed into the sports car, then it would be clear that he would not have shown a sufficient duty of care, and might be regarded as either negligent or perhaps reckless. But this is not the case. In fact Jim was performing his duties as a professional driver admirably through trying to avoid the drunken pedestrian. Everything that occurred from that point on:- from the crash with the car, the nervous shock supposedly suffered by Elsie and her mother and the failure to buy the winning lottery ticket - came about because of this initial perfectly justifiable act upon the part of Jim. However, Elsie and her mother might have a case if it could be shown that the manner in which Jim avoided the pedestrian was negligent/reckless by the standards of a reasonable HGV driver. The facts that are given within the case do not show this was the case at all. For the sake of argument, let us assume that Jim did show