Negligence Flashcards
In factors affecting negligence, one of which is the person of the affected person. What is the rule in the case of Taylor v. Manila Electric Road?
The general rule is, the owner’s failure to take reasonable precautions to prevent the child from entering his premises to guard the child against injury from unknown or unseen dangers, placed upon such premises by the owner, is clearly a breach of duty.
However, in this case, the corporation was not held negligence since at that time, the affected child was more mature both physically and mentally than the average boy of his age.
In factors affecting negligence, one of which is the person of the affected person. What is the rule with regards to bicycles and motorists?
The bicycle occupies a legal position that is at least equal to that of other vehicles lawfully on the highway, and it is fortified by the fact that usually more will be required of a motorist than a bicyclist in discharging his duty of care to the other because of the physical advantages the automobile has over the bicycle.
In factors affecting negligence, one of which is the person of the affected person. What is the rule in the case of United States v. Bonifacio, with regards to a deaf person crossing the tracks?
Ordinarily, all that may properly be required of an engine driver under such circumstances is that he give warning of his approach, by blowing his whistle or ringing his bell until he is assured that the attention of the pedestrian has been attracted to the oncoming train.
However in this case, there was nothing in the appearance or conduct of the victim of the accident which would have warned the accused engine driver that the man walking along the side of the track was a deaf-mute, and that despite the blowing of the whistle and the noise of the engine he was unconscious of his danger.
What is the doctrine of attractive nuisance?
Under the doctrine of attractive nuisance, one who maintains on his premises dangerous instrumentalities or appliances of a character likely to attract children in play, and who fails to exercise ordinary care to prevent children from playing therewith or resorting thereto, is liable to a child of tender years who is injured thereby, even if the child is technically a trespasser in the premises.
One of the factors affecting negligence is the expertise of the person. What is the rule?
An act may be negligent if it is done without the competence that a reasonable person in the position of the actor would recognize as necessary to prevent it from creating an unreasonable risk of harm to another. Those who undertake any work calling for special skills are required not only to exercise reasonable care in what they do but also possess a standard minimum of special knowledge and ability.
If a person holds himself out to be competent, what is his liability?
When a person holds himself out as being competent to do things requiring professional skill, he will be held liable for negligence if he fails to exhibit the care and skill of one ordinarily skilled in the particular work which he attempts to do.
What is the presumption in motor vehicle mishaps involving a driver and the owner of the vehicle in which both are in the vehicle at the time of the accident?
In motor vehicle mishaps, the owner is solidarily liable with his driver, if the former, who was in the vehicle, could have, by the use of the due diligence, prevented the misfortune. It is disputably presumed that a driver was negligent, if he had been found guilty of reckless driving or violating traffic regulations at least twice within the next preceding two months.
What is the presumption of a person driving a motor vehicle at had a mishap?
Unless there is proof to the contrary, it is presumed that a person driving a motor vehicle has been negligent if at the time of the mishap, he was violating any traffic regulation.
What is the rule of Res Ipsa Loquitur?
Res Ipsa Loquitur is a rule of evidence whereby negligence of the alleged wrongdoer may be inferred from the mere fact that the accident happened provided the character of the accident and circumstances attending it lead reasonably to belief that in the absence of negligence it would not have occurred and that thing which caused injury is shown to have been under the management and control of the alleged wrongdoer.
With regards to a neighbor causing a lot of inconvenience to his other neighbors by reason of constructions undertaken by the former, what is the rule?
There was fault or negligence on the part of the constructing neighbor when he did not provide sufficient safety measures to prevent causing a lot of inconvenience and disturbance to the adjacent neighbor.
If the proximate cause of the damage is the construction company’s negligence, what is the rule?
Contractors of building should have taken the roles of the wise and prudent father to their customers or clients as they are specialists in themselves as their field of know-how in technology would always be demanded and extracted of them by all their patrons. If they failed to exercise that necessary care, they are held liable.
With regards to the liability of engineers and architects, what is the rule?
The engineer or architect who drew up the plans and specifications for a building is liable for damages if within fifteen years from the completion of the structure, the same should collapse by reason of a defect in those plans and specifications, or due to the defects in the ground. If the engineer or architect supervises the construction, he shall be solidarily liable with the contractor. If a third person suffers damages by reason of these defects, the third person suffering damages may proceed only against the engineer or architect or contractor.
What is the informed consent doctrine?
The doctrine of informed consent requires that a health care provider disclose material risks and information about a proposed medical treatment to enable the patient to make an informed decision. In cases alleging a lack of informed consent, expert testimony is necessary to establish the medical standard of care for disclosure of risks related to the treatment.
What are the elements for the doctrine of informed consent to apply?
(1) The physician had a duty to disclose material risks
(2) He failed to disclose or inadequately disclosed those risks
(3) As a direct and proximate result of the failure to disclose, the patient consented to treatment she otherwise would not have consented to
(4) Plaintiff was injured by the proposed treatment
What are the requisites of res ipsa loquitur?
The requisites for the applicability of the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur are:
(1) The occurrence of an injury
(2) The thing which caused the injury was under the control and management of the defendant
(3) The occurrence was such that in the ordinary course of things, would not have happened if those who had control or management used proper care; and
(4) The absence of explanation by the defendant.
