Introduction
Negligence is a legal concept is applicable where individuals seek to obtain compensation for injuries or rather in people’s injury lawsuits. Negligence is applied in situations where someone was careless in causing another person’s injury. The careless entity is thus perceived as legally liable for the harm that resulted1.
Proving fault
In proving fault, the plaintiff must present arguments that show that the defendant had a legal duty to ensure his care in the presented circumstances; the defendant breached his contract through failure to fulfill his legal duties and thus caused harm to the plaintiff5. On these grounds, therefore, Lan has leeway to sue OzCom because he has sufficient proof that damage occurred as a result of OzCom’s products.
Additionally, it is unarguable that OzCom has a duty of care for its clients even in situations where they have already sold their computers. They must ensure that the consumer is protected as he puts the product to use; this means it should not result in harm or else it would constitute negligence. The fact that the company supposedly fitted their machinery with the ‘recommended’ anti-glare filters before sale raises eyebrows regarding the quality and capacity of those filters to protect the consumer. The company must have ensured that the filters were of the required standards and sufficient to protect their clients.
OzCom’s defense
In defense, OzCom can claim contributory negligence was at play. This means that Lan contributed to his injury since he used the computer for hours that exceed the obvious recommended measure daily. Therefore as much as the computer might have contributed to his injury, he made himself more vulnerable to injury. He was therefore also careless in part not to follow the advice that prohibits excessive exposure to computer radiation.
Bibliography
Stone, Richard. The modern law of contract. UK: Routledge, 2002.
Footnotes
- Richard Stone. The modern law of contract. (UK: Routledge, 2002), 146.