The Development and Application of the Directorss Duty of Care and Diligence Rule in Australia

The onus on therapists to seek the consent of their patients before publishing clinical material may be one reason why so few decide to write about their experience. There are inevitable and unavoidable tensions in balancing the duty of care to patients with other ethical responsibilities, including the needs of the professional community for education and scientific advancement. In this paper, we explore the context and dynamics of seeking consent from couples and families to publish material relating to their therapy and propose a way to manage some of the ethical dilemmas involved in writing about patients that is in keeping with the contemporary analytic literature on the interpersonal unconscious between patient and therapist, and the interpsychic/interpersonal dimensions of therapeutic action. Throughout this paper, the term “patient” is used to designate couples and families as well as individuals.

Download Full-text

Negligence and the Duty of Care; the Demise of the Caparo Test; and Police Immunity Revisited: Robinson v Chief Constable of West Yorkshire

Edinburgh Law Review ◽

10.3366/elr.2019.0526 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 23 (1) ◽

pp. 82-88 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Gordon Cameron

Keyword(s):

Duty Of Care

Download Full-text

Directors' Liability in Negligence – Challenging the "Elements of the Tort" Approach

Victoria University of Wellington Law Review ◽

10.26686/vuwlr.v47i3.4790 ◽

2016 ◽

Vol 47 (3) ◽

pp. 485

Author(s):

Victoria Stace

Keyword(s):

Third Parties ◽

Duty Of Care ◽

Constructive Approach ◽

Two Stage ◽

Policy Issues ◽

Threshold Test

This article suggests that the "elements of the tort" approach to directors' liability in negligence to third parties should be discontinued on the basis that assumption of responsibility as a threshold test is not an element of the tort of negligence or negligent misstatement and a more constructive approach would be to address the policy issues associated with imposing liability on directors as part of the two-stage duty of care inquiry.

Download Full-text

Search for Principle - The Government's Liability in Negligence for the Careless Exercise of its Statutory Powers

Victoria University of Wellington Law Review ◽

10.26686/vuwlr.v31i3.5945 ◽

2000 ◽

Vol 31 (3) ◽

pp. 629

Author(s):

Thomas Geuther

Keyword(s):

New Zealand ◽

Public Law ◽

Public Authority ◽

Special Treatment ◽

Duty Of Care ◽

Supreme Court Of Canada ◽

Public Authorities ◽

High Court ◽

The Supreme Court ◽

High Court Of Australia

For many years the English courts have struggled to develop a principled approach for determining when a public authority can owe a duty of care in respect of the exercise of its statutory powers. Initially, public authorities received no special treatment. Then the courts conferred an almost complete immunity on them, requiring public law irrationality to be established before considering whether a duty could arise. The English approach has not been adopted elsewhere in the Commonwealth. The High Court of Australia and the Supreme Court of Canada have developed different tests, and the New Zealand courts, while never explicitly rejecting the English position, have never followed it. This paper argues that a modified version of the Canadian Supreme Court's approach should be adopted in New Zealand. It proposes that irrationality be a precondition to the existence of a duty of care only where policy considerations are proved to have influenced the decisions of a public authority in exercising its statutory powers.

Download Full-text

MENIMBANG PRINSIP ”DUTY OF CARE”: ‘PEMBELI’ MELAWAN ‘PEMBELI’ DALAM SENGKETA JUAL BELI TANAH

Jurnal Yudisial ◽

10.29123/jy.v10i1.133 ◽

2017 ◽

Vol 10 (1) ◽

pp. 99

Author(s):

Widodo Dwi Putro ◽

Ahmad Zuhairi

Keyword(s):

Legal Protection ◽

Good Faith ◽

Duty Of Care ◽

Court Decisions ◽

Analysis Method ◽

Legal Standing ◽

Physical Data ◽

Agrarian Law ◽

Land Sale

ABSTRAKSengketa jual beli tanah dalam perkara ini menyeret pihak penjual yang telah menjual objek yang sama kepada dua pembeli dalam dua kali transaksi. Pembeli kedua (penggugat) melayangkan gugatannya terhadap pembeli pertama (tergugat II). Posisi hukumnya dilematis. Kedua pembeli sama-sama merasa mempunyai hak atas tanah sengketa karena telah membeli objek yang sama dari penjual. Untuk membuktikan siapa pembeli yang berhak, hakim perlu mempertimbangkan asas "iktikad baik" (good faith), sebagai dasar untuk menentukan pembeli yang patut mendapat perlindungan hukum. Permasalahannya, kedua pembeli sama-sama mengklaim dirinya adalah pembeli yang beriktikad baik. Sehingga, untuk menilai siapa pembeli yang patut mendapat perlindungan hukum, hakim berpegangan pada prinsip duty of care, dengan mempertimbangkan siapa pembeli yang berhati-hati dan cermat memeriksa data yuridis dan data fisik sebelum dan saat jual beli dilakukan. Prinsip duty of care ini bersifat abstrak, maka metode penulisan yang digunakan, menelusuri dan mengkaji pendapat para ahli hukum perdata dan agraria untuk didialogkan dengan putusan-putusan hakim. Perkembangan putusan-putusan pengadilan mengenai pembeli beriktikad baik yang mengadopsi prinsip duty of care, seharusnya menjadi 'pegangan' para hakim dalam menangani kasus yang serupa, untuk menilai kapan pembeli dikategorikan sebagai pembeli beriktikad baik.Kata kunci: iktikad baik, perlindungan hukum, duty of care, data yuridis dan fisik.ABSTRACTThe dispute of land sale and purchase in this case drag the seller who had sold the same object to two buyers in two transactions. The second buyer (plaintiff) filed a lawsuit against the first buyer (defendant II). Its legal standing created a dilemma. Both buyers felt equally entitled to be the owner of the disputed land, which is the same object purchased from the seller. In providing evidence of the most eligible buyer, the judge should take into consideration the principle of "good faith" as the basis for determining the buyer deserving legal protection. The problem is that both buyers claimed that they were buyers of good faith. Therefore, to appraise which buyer deserving the legal protection, the judges adhered to principle of "duty of care" by taking into account which one of them was carefully and meticulously reading-through the juridical and physical data prior to and during the sale and purchase of the land was conducted. Given the abstract nature of the principle of "duty of care" the analysis method used in this discussion is exploring and studying the opinions of the experts of civil and agrarian law as to be juxtaposed with the decisions of the judges. The development of court decisions related to the issue of good faith buyers adopting the principle of "duty of care" should serve as a reference for the judges in handling similar cases to determine a good faith buyer.Keywords: good faith, legal protection, duty of care, juridical and physical data.

Download Full-text