Aviation Law: Reflective Diary Exercise

Word Count: 900

Part 1:

Reflection

The topic covered in the modules is tort law. I found this topic very interesting since it is more interested in compensating the wronged individuals rather than punishing the perpetrator of the wrong. I believe this is interesting because it is out of the norm of the customary law, which is more concerned with punishing the offender ( Module 3a). What I like about this law is the compensation aspect which places an individual in a better position to afford the necessary medical help or any form of help they may not have to afford. It also helps them recover from any losses they may have incurred, significantly impacting their families. Thus, it helps put safety before any gain by employers. Thus, it helps in preserving the quality of life.

However, the compensation aspect also comes as a challenge, which I dont like about this law. Unlike criminal cases, the wrongdoer goes unpunished after offering monetary compensation in most cases. This generally neglects the impact of the wrong on the general society. I believe individuals must be liable and held accountable for their wrongdoings and be punished adequately. Thus, while they offer monetary compensation, I believe it is only fair that they are held accountable for society. The area I would like to focus more on is defenses to negligence.

(2.0) Marks

Part 2:

What area of law did the lecture consider?

The lecture considered various elements and legal rules, principles related to tort law, legislation, international rules and regulations, and common laws and how they are related to tort law. For the first item, tort law elements are four: duty, breach of duty, causation, and injury. A tort generally happens when an individual or a particular entity or body inflicts an injury to another individual resulting in injury. The injured individual can then sue the defendant to receive compensation. This means that for a tort case to be well-founded, there must be a breach of duty by an individual (the defendant) against another...…assault, the lecture looked at a sample case, Zanker v Vartzokas (1988) 34A Crim R 11, in which a young woman who was offered a car lift was offered money in exchange for sexual favors. Upon this, she asked the driver to let her out of the car, but the driver sped up, making some comments that suggested potential sexual abuse. The plaintiff thus jumped off the moving car. However, she did not sustain an injury. The court established that the directness was present since the battery would take place in the future with a high likelihood of it. Another case study in module 3b is Raynolds v Clarke (1725), highlighted under trespass in tort law (Module 3b). Another case was Malister or Donoghue v Stevenson (1932) in Paisley. In this case, Ms. Donoghue consumed a drink that contained a decomposing snail, something she only realized after she had consumed most of the drink. Thus, she took legal action against Stevenson. In this case, the ruling established the tort law of negligence…