Explain what has to be proven to establish and argue how likely it is that Sanjit and Tina will beÂ successful in their claim against Roger. Your answer should refer to relevant case law in support of your arguments.
(a) Professionals need to be aware of the potential liability arising from negligent misstatement when providing advice.
Explain how the law operates in this area and the potential steps a professional advisor should take to avoid such liability.
(b) Roger and Sanjit are partners in an internet marketing company based in the Midlands. They are travelling by car to
London to make a pitch to a client. Roger was driving and talking to Sanjit about the forthcoming meeting. Suddenly,
Roger, for no apparent reason, lost control of the car and knocked over Tina who was crossing the road near to her school.
Tina suffered a broken pelvis and was hospitalised for several months. Sanjit, who was not wearing his seat belt, suffered
severe head injuries.
Explain what has to be proven to establish negligence liability and argue how likely it is that Sanjit and Tina will be
successful in their claim against Roger.
Your answer should refer to relevant case law in support of your arguments.
LENGTH: 2000 words (discretion of 10% over / under the word limit) â so maximum word count 2200.
Plagiarism (i.e. direct copying from books etc. or representing other writers’ work as your own) will result in a FAIL.
Submission of course work: See page 11 (above)
Legal Aspects of Business â custom textbook â see:
Chapters 13 and 14.
Relevant journal articles
Please note: The following journal articles can be accessed through the Library Search option. Type the journal name (eg
âNew Law Journal”) into the box, click on the relevant search result and then log in through the resource (eg Lexis Library)
to access the article.
1 âPersonal Injury â Snail Trailâ â Keith Patten
New Law Journal
162 NLJ 643
11th May 2012
(Eighty years on, Keith Patten traces the legacy of Donoghue v Stevenson)
2 âThe sliding snailâ Jon
New Law Journal
157 NLJ 168
2 February 2007
(Negligence has changed since Donoghue v Stevensonâand not for the better, argues Jon Holbrook).
3 âPersonal Injury: Sliding Awayâ â Keith Patten
New Law Journal
161 NLJ 1124
12th August 2011
(Keith Patten observes the move away from compensation for claimants who were in part liable for their injury)
4 Stop or go? Ruth
New Law Journal
156 NLJ 67
13 January 2006
(Ruth Winterbottom explains why a Court of Appeal decision in favour of motorists could have wider implications for the law
5 Judgment in Knucklehead v Goodfellow
New Law Journal
157 NLJ 1122
3 August 2007
(Judge Irongirdle laments the inadequacies of claimants in person and district judges).
6 Morgan L. (2009) The law relating to negligent misstatement and its impact on professionals such as Accountants and
Solicitors. University of Wales Newport (Article repoduced in full in Blackboard)
7 Pure Economic Loss http://fds.oup.com/www.oup.com/pdf/13/9780199289714.pdf
8 OâFarrell F. (2009) Professional negligence in the construction field
9 Stylianou M (2011) Pure economic loss in negligence â has England got it wrong? Has Australia got it right? 1 SSLR
10) The Curious Incident of the Dog that did Bark in the NightTime:
What Mischief does Hedley Byrne v Heller Correct?
Any additional reading items will be posted on Blackboard.
Format of answer and citation of sources used
1. Cite cases as follows: Smith v Patel (1968). Partiesâ names should be italicised or underlined. If in doubt check handouts
or the textbooks.
2. Use cases (i) to support a proposition of law, or (ii) to illustrate a point. Use as appropriate when stating and applying the
law (for example by comparing the facts with the question to decide if the facts fall within or outside of the case).
eg (i) âA party may be fixed with notice of an exclusion clause by a regular course of previous dealings between the parties:
Spurling v Bradshaw (1956)â.
eg (ii) âAn advertisement can amount to an offer. In Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball Co (1892) an advertisement offered a
Â£100 reward for anyone who used their smoke ball and contracted âflu. In addition, the Smoke Ball Company stated that it
had deposited Â£1000 in the bank âto show our sincerity in the matterâ. The Court of Appeal held that the reward, combined
with the bank deposit, showed a clear intention by the Smoke Ball Company to be bound by the terms of the advert, and so
the advert constituted an offer.â
3. Write in essay, not report, style. Use paragraphs. Avoid subheadings.
4. Cite original sources where possible. So, if quoting from a statute, or a case, do not cite the textbook in which you saw
that quote. Simply cite the statute or case (which you will find in the textbooks). Remember the Universityâs plagiarism
5. Donât forget the technique for the problem (or âcasestudyâ)
questions (see seminar one): (i) identify the issues. (Start by
stating who is suing whom and for what. Then select the likely contestable elements in your cause(s) of action)Í¾ (ii) state the
relevant law for each of these issuesÍ¾ (iii) subject those issues to that law (or âapply the lawâ)Í¾ (iv) conclude. Note, if the facts
are vague, then speculate, eg âIf it were the case that … then Jones v Patel would apply because …..â You may go further
and suggest alternative outcomes: âOn the other hand if….â
6 A bibliography of sources used must be listed at the end of the answer.
Legal Aspects of Business Assessment
An answer that demonstrates accurate understanding of the relevant law appropriate to the question. An answer that
demonstrates the ability to analyse legal concepts and to explain/argue them in relation to the question.
The answer should be clearly discussed with relevant cases referred to and a clear understanding of the legal issues
relating to them. Good understanding of problem questions with relevant application of the law with the possibilities
The answer should be of appropriate length and should show that the student has done sufficient reading. Some minor
mistakes are acceptable.
Similar to above but maybe some important points missed out or not so clearly explained. Maybe fewer cases covered.
However, the answer should demonstrate a good understanding of the topic.
A reasonably good understanding shown, but weaker skills of analysis or argument displayed. An answer which has less
case law, or where the understanding of the cases is not so clear. The answer may have some aspects misunderstood or
left out. An answer that is perhaps less well structured.
The answer shows a general and perhaps rather vague understanding of the topic. Maybe has some aspects not covered
or which are covered incorrectly. There may be little or virtually no case law covered. 40% is the minimum pass mark.
A marginal fail. The answer has some elements of understanding but not sufficient to achieve a pass. The answer may
simply be too short to achieve a higher mark.
A clear fail. The answer shows no or hardly any understanding of the topic. Alternatively the answer is so short (eg a few
lines) that it cannot achieve a higher mark, even if the points stated are correct. This is a wide grade so an answer of (eg)
30% will show some understanding, albeit poor, compared to a lower mark.
PLACE THIS ORDER OR A SIMILAR ORDER WITH US TODAY AND GET AN AMAZING DISCOUNT