Negligence – Part of daily hassles

Negligence – Part of daily hassles


A person has a legal obligation to treat others with care. If this obligation is breached and another person suffers loss as a result, the tort of negligence has been committed.

As is well known, English Common Law serves as the foundation for Indian tort law. As a result, Indian courts establish and alter negligence legislation according to the principles of justice, equity, and morality. The Latin word negligentia, which meaning “failing to pick up,” is where the word “negligence” originates. In the broadest meaning, the word “negligence” refers to the act of being careless; in the legal sense, it refers to the failure to exercise the level of care that a reasonable person in the same position would have exercised. Only in the 18th century did negligence become a distinct cause of action under English law.

Elements of negligence are as follows :-

1 . Duty of care

Whether the defendant owed the plaintiff a duty affects whether a case of negligence is successful or unsuccessful. When the law acknowledges a connection between the defendant and the plaintiff and calls on the defendant to behave in a specific way, a duty is created. A court often decides whether a defendant owed a plaintiff a duty of care, and would typically conclude that there is an obligation if a reasonable person would conclude that there is a duty under identical circumstances.

2 . Breach of duty of care

The mere assertion that someone owed them a duty is insufficient to establish a duty. The negligent party’s breach of their obligation to the other person must also be demonstrated by the personal injury attorney. A defendant violates this obligation by failing to take reasonable precautions. A jury must find as a matter of fact whether a defendant violated a duty of care. In the aforementioned illustration, a jury would determine whether the defendant handled the grain bags close to the pedestrian with reasonable care.

3 . Cause in fact of the injury

According to the standard legal obligations in negligence proceedings, the plaintiff must demonstrate that the defendant’s activities were the real reason for their injury. This is frequently referred to as “but-for” causation, which means that the plaintiff’s injury would not have happened but for the defendant’s acts.

In the aforementioned case, the pedestrian could establish this need by demonstrating that, but for the defendant’s carelessness in tossing the grain, the injury victim would not have been harmed.

4 . Proximity cause of harm

In a negligence case, proximate cause refers to the extent of the defendant’s liability. In a negligence case, the defendant is only liable for damages that they could have foreseen by acting accordingly. The plaintiff cannot establish that the defendant’s activities were the direct cause of the plaintiff’s damages if the defendant created damages that were beyond the range of risks that the defendant might have anticipated.

5 . Damages and Harm

A plaintiff in a negligence lawsuit must establish a legally recognised wrong, which is typically manifested as bodily harm to a person or to property, such as a car in a collision. It is insufficient that the defendant did not use reasonable care. A person to whom the defendant had a duty of care must actually suffer damages as a result of the defendant’s failure to use reasonable care, and a personal injury claim must be filed in court within the necessary time limit.

When someone puts others in danger by failing to exercise reasonable care, that person has engaged in negligence. A person must be aware that there is a considerable and unreasonable danger associated with an action that reflects an egregious departure from the acceptable standard of care in order to be guilty of criminal negligence. Law enforcement agencies file criminal negligence lawsuits.

An individual may file a civil lawsuit against another party who negligently caused them injury. If the victim is no longer alive or has passed away, the family may bring charges on the victim’s behalf. Even if a person did not intend to act negligently, they may nevertheless be held civilly liable for their acts. There are numerous instances of negligence that could result in a legal case.

Gross negligence

Gross negligence goes beyond mere carelessness and is characterised by a reckless disregard for other people’s safety. It is conduct that is excessive disrespect for the health and safety of others and is done with willfulness, willful disobedience, or malice.

In other words , Gross negligence is the willful or extreme disregard for another person’s safety. Gross negligence goes beyond ordinary carelessness or inaction. It is deliberate activity carried out with a flagrant disrespect for other people’s health and safety. It is behaviour that could reasonably be expected to harm.

Gross negligence is wrong; grave wrong is the same as fraud.

A nursing home employee who neglects to give a resident food or drink for several days or, in some circumstances, a drunk motorist are examples of excessive negligence. If the at-fault driver was intoxicated and moving at a fast speed when they struck the other car, then there may have been gross negligence in the case of the collision. In a worst-case situation, it might be possible to establish gross negligence by demonstrating that someone intentionally slammed another person’s car in a fit of rage and hurt them.

If your personal injury claim can demonstrate extreme negligence, you can be eligible for more compensation and possibly punitive damages, which are intended to punish the at-fault party.

You might want to get in touch with a skilled personal injury lawyer in your region to discuss your case and see whether you have a claim for gross negligence since it must be established that the injury or property damage was the result of willful actions or reckless disregard for others’ safety.

The amount of damages granted to the injured party may be raised, and it may also include punitive damages meant to punish the culprit, if the harm or damage to property was caused by purposeful conduct or gross negligence.

The majority of auto accidents are the result of ordinary negligence, such as driving carelessly, however depending on the situation, an injury accident brought on by a drunk driver may occasionally be seen as an instance of severe negligence.

Reference :-

1 .
2 .
3 .
4 . THE LAW OF TORTS by Dhirajlal & Ratanlal

Author: Harsh Srivastava,
Second Year Law Student /The University of Petroleum & Energy Studies

Leave a Comment