Tort of Negligence Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2750 words

Tort of Negligence - Essay Example Per say the concept of negligence doe not refer to an act. Actually it is a legal concept that tends to define the basic character of an act so as to prove it to be legally wrong. As per Blyth vs. Birmingham Waterworks Co. (1856), â€Å"Negligence is the omission to do something which a reasonable man, guided upon those considerations which ordinarily regulate the conduct of human affairs, would do, or doing something which a prudent and reasonable man would not do.† However, once the concept of negligence came within the scope of the English Tort Law, the next logical and plausible challenge was to decide as to what qualifies to be termed as ‘ordinary care† and what was to be the nature and basis of the measure required to decide as to whether an act committed by an individual, organization or a group amounted to negligence. In that context, one needs to mention the much famous concept of ‘the man on the Clapham Omnibus’. ... The ‘man on the Clapham Omnibus’ represented a hypothetical person who is in general reasonable and well educated without being qualified enough to be called a specialist (Twining 64). ‘The man on the Clapham Omnibus’ represented the standard of reasoning with which to gauge a defendant’s conduct in an English Law Civil Action for Negligence. The hallmark of this concept was that it delineated and put in place a standard for ascertaining and establishing the charges of negligence on a defendant. It established a general standard of care expected of any English citizen while performing varied aspects of one’s personal or professional life. The real beauty of this standard is that it tends to be reasonable yet simple in its approach and tends to bring the legal concept of negligence within the grasp and scope of the so called common man. The very fact that this standard of care does not expect perfection on the part of ascertainers obliterates an y possibility on the part of the defendants to wriggle out of the clutches of law by resorting to technical jargon and rigmarole. It is also immensely humane and pragmatic in the sense that it do recognizes the fact that an average person lacks the foresight to foresee any risk accruing by the dint of one’s actions. Still, it is astutely responsible and practical in the sense that it enjoins on the average person the duty to be ordinarily prudent and careful, without tending to be unexceptionally or unrealistically flawless. There is no denying the fact that even the most virtuoso experts in jurisprudence do tend to overlook and appreciate the sophistication and beauty inherent in the concept of ‘the man on the Clapham Omnibus’. However, the reality is that this legal idiom not only validated the concept