Negligence and Insurance Law


1. Radar should file petition against Hawkeye for the loss assets he had. As the consequences show that this a kind of tort and it can happen to any person or place. The major thing is, Hawkeye was ordered to perform a function kind of place for the function. It’s but obvious such kind ceremony had lot of people and they can lose the exact statement of mind in the excitation. These functions are too exiting. Here come the negligence and more precisely we can say duty of care. Radar was totally dependent on the infrastructure and Hawkeye had and any kind of negligence towards safety is punishable. Same cases have been reported where no duty of care was considered as  inMee-Hsiang Lee v 69 Mott Street corporation, 638 N.Y.S. 2d 261 (NY 1999), and taking in account with this case Radar should be paid for his loss. According to specific consideration of standard of care and breach of care in hospitality management the managing premises which offer hospitality services have a duty to check out all the conditions of spot and place well managed for such kind of meeting and function. Managing premises have duty regularly inspect and premises to allocate, identify and remove such kind of problems which is dangerous or may be dangerous in public safety.

A. If the stage was constructed by any independent the same condition will be applied for thatindependent company and in that case Hawkeye can recover the loss from that particular independent company. Since an event is only permitted from the governing bodies if one take responsibility of people safety any kind of ignorance is considered as negligence of duty. (Waugh v Duke corporation, 248 F.Supp 626 (N.C. 1966))

B. Whatever the preexisting condition are there but this misshaping if avoided there would be no such case and as Lord Denning said in Cork v Kirby McLean Ltd (1952) 2 ALL ER 402 at 407, “If you can say that the damage would not have happened but for a particular fault, then that fault is in fact a cause of the damage, but if you can say, that the damage would have happened just the same, fault or no fault, then the fault is not a cause of the damage”. This is best example to take reference.

C. only making an announcement does not mean the duty of care is done, Hawkeye must had some close boundary or some guards which assure the complete safety for the public, and this activity if were checked by anyhow Radar would not have faced such a big loos.

2. Radar in such case can claim for loss to the insurance company under pursuant act

According to common law an insured should possess an insurable interest in the subject matter of the contract.  A person will have such an interest if they will profit from the property being conserved and suffer loss if the property is damaged or demolished.  The main purpose of needful the possession of an insurable interest is to avoid the insured from purposely damaging the subject matter and then claiming on the insurance.  If an insured did not have an insurable interest when the contract was made and when the loss occurred, the insurer could avoid or fail to pay any claim. According to Duty of Disclosure under the ActS21 the duty to disclose material fact is discusses. The insured is only indebted to disclose matters that they know are material to the decision of the actual insurer involved, whether or not to accept the risk, and if so on what terms, (s21(1)(a)). Frequently, a non-disclosure may arise from failing to answer honestly and fully questions contained in the proposal document, but it should be noted that the duty of disclosure extends to the disclosure of matters not raised in the proposal.  Therefore an insured may breach the duty of disclosure even though they have answered honestly all questions in the proposal. A breach may occur if the insured failed to inform the insurer of other material facts that would affect the insurer’s decision to assume the risk.




1。雷达可以申诉鹰眼的资产损失他。作为结果表明,这是一种侵权行为,它可以发生在任何人或地方。主要的一点是,鹰眼奉命执行功能的地方的功能。这是显而易见的一种仪式有很多人,他们失去了确切的声明的精神激励。这些功能也退出。到这里来的疏忽和更精确,我们可以说注意义务。雷达是完全依赖基础设施和鹰眼和任何一种过失向安全要。同一病例报告,没有义务照顾被视为inmee-hsiang李69莫特街公司,638 n.y.s.二维261(纽约1999),并在帐户与本案的雷达应支付的损失。根据具体的考虑标准的护理和照顾违反酒店管理管理处所提供接待服务有责任检查所有的条件,以及管理等功能会议。管理单位有义务定期检查和房屋分配,找出并消除此类问题是危险的或可能是危险的公共安全。

答:如果这个阶段是由任何独立相同的条件下将用于thatindependent公司在这种情况下鹰眼可以挽回损失,特别独立公司。因为一个事件是只允许从理事机构如果一个负责人安全的任何一种无知为玩忽职守。(五杜克公司沃,248 F .增刊626(美国1966))

B .无论存在的条件,但这是有misshaping如果避免就没有这样的情况下,为丹宁勋爵说五科比麦克莱恩软木有限公司(1952)2 402 407,“如果你可以说,损害将不会发生,但对于一个特定的故障,那么故障其实是一个造成的损害,但如果你可以说,这会损害发生的,过错或无过错,那错不损害的原因”。这是最好的例子,请参考。