OPPapers.com Essay Index >> Social Issues >> The Duty Of Bystanders To Rescue
We have many free term papers and essays on The Duty Of Bystanders To Rescue. We also have a wide variety of research papers and book reports available to you for free. You can browse our collection of term papers or use our search engine.
The duty of bystanders to rescue TPL 2 Research Assignment Introduction Traditionally the law of torts in Australia and many other common law countries (e.g. England,
(Good 2008). While most of the states do have acts of this nature, none of them include a duty to rescue. For example, according to the German law of Unterlassene
the victim. In certain circumstances, any norms favoring intervention may be weakened, leading bystanders to choose the easiest resolution to the conflict; by looking
refugees in the U.S., based on security reasons and the critical food shortage. They ruled out rescue operations because that would require diversion from the war
Particularly infuriating to blacks and other abolitionists was the provision that compelled bystanders to assist in captures or face fines and imprisonment. Antislavery
Submitted by le_shi on May 20, 2006
Category: Social Issues
Words: 1733 | Pages: 7
Views: 177
Popularity Rank: 79,116
Average Member Grade: N/A (Add a Comment / Grade this Paper)
TPL 2 Research Assignment
Introduction
Traditionally the law of torts in Australia and many other common law countries (e.g. England, Canada) have been reluctant to impose upon bystanders a general duty to aid the proverbial baby drowning in a puddle of water,' though there have been several exceptions to the general rule which the courts have distinguished, usually where some sort of prior relationship exists between the parties. Protagonists of a duty to rescue' tend to base their arguments around the idea that contemporary morality demands the law impose some sort of co-ercive measure upon those who chance by others in dire straits, drawing comparisons with areas where law reflects morality, as well as examples of jurisdictions where legislation introducing a positive duty to rescue have been enforced. Antagonists to the idea of an affirmative duty to act to the benefit of others tend to stress the importance of individual liberties within democratic societies on the one hand, and highlight the problems present in setting criteria for when a duty should exist in the other. As Australian tort law attempts to adhere to the principle of restitutio and prevent the emergence of a culture of blame' simultaneously, the result is that there is not likely to be a single correct' answer, however this essay will attempt to justify the imposition of a limited duty in a manner which considers both sides of the argument.
Proximity & Foreseeability
The first hurdle that must be crossed is reasonable foreseeability, which according to the High Court in Sullivan is necessary but not sufficient,' however in most cases concerning rescue foreseeability is generally not an issue. To date, Australian tort law has predominantly approached the issue of a duty to render assistance by focusing on the degree of proximity between two parties. The fact that both are human beings cannot be sufficient cause for...
You must Login to view the entire paper.
If you are not a member yet, Sign Up for free!