Lance And Cadella V Numeracy Council

945 Words4 Pages
Question 1 In the case of Lance and Cadella v Parramatta Council there is a breach of rights of Lance in regard to Parramatta Council or in other words, breach of the law of tort. A tort is a civil wrong in common law jurisdictions which causes someone to suffer loss or damage which results in legal liability for the person who commits tortious action. The plaintiff is the person who initiates the case and the person who is harmed or has suffered pecuniary loss. The defendant is the party who inflicts injury and bears the liability is known as tortfeasor. Tort law helps the victim to get the compensation for the harm suffered, transfer the cost to tortfeasor and mainly discourages careless, risky and injurious behaviour in the…show more content…
He collided with a chain strung by the Parramatta Council and suffered serious injuries. He was unaware about the chain strung on the way as few days ago he rode through the same passage and there was no chain strung by the council that time. The action of tort does not depend on the consent of parties in relation to the particular law suit. Action of tort requires the establishment of some of the points: The plaintiff (in this case Lance and Cadella) has to establish that the defendant was doing their legal duty; the defendant (Parramatta Council) breached the legal duty by acting in a particular manner and the injury suffered is a direct result of the breach. Torts may be classified into several ways, mainly classified in intentional and unintentional torts. In the case of Lance and Cadella v Parramatta Council, there was a case of unintentional tort. Amongst the unintentional torts, Lance and Cadella should take up the action of negligence against the council. Even though Lance and his wife were riding fast on the route but they were acting in the same way as they did few days ago. Then, there were no chain strung on the route. Putting on the chain without informing and not putting on the notice to create awareness, the council may be…show more content…
The council’s negligence leading to failure to inform the cyclists about the changes held the council responsible for the damages done to Lance and Cadella. The circumstances created by the Parramatta council leaded the private lives of Lance and Cadella into a risky environment to which they fell prey and suffered injuries. They should sue the council the Parramatta Council for payment of damages and for the compensation. The action to be brought up by the plaintiff (Lance and Cadella) in the case should be of negligence against the defendant (Parramatta Council). The negligence showed by the council also sheds light on the lack of consideration shown for the public. The council did not even bother to paint the chain with a different colour to make it noticeable. The council could have used any of the methods to create awareness rather than just putting up the chain on the path. There were no actions taken by the council to stop or prevent the possible accident on the path. There were no clear signs put by the council to inform the riders. Lance and Cadella should sue the Parramatta Council under the action of negligence and should claim for compensation and payment of damages from the

    More about Lance And Cadella V Numeracy Council

      Open Document