This document is an extensive compilation of lecture and working group notes as well as relevant case law and articles for the ‘Contract & Tort Law’ course offered at the University of Groningen. The materials contained provide insight into the content for this class, the structure of exam answ...
What is Contract and Tort Law about?
- Contracts
- Torts
- Property
Solve cases by applying:
1. Case law
2. Draft Common Frames of Reference (DCFR)
Exam:
- Separate questions about DCFR and case law
Private law is mainly national law
- Predominantly national law
- Exceptions:
1. Treaties
a. Convention on the International Sale of Goods
2. Directives
3. Regulations
Two systems of private law:
1. Civil law (no duty of care available)
2. Common law (fundamental differences; have duty of care)
DCFR & Restatements
- Where local/national laws differ the need for an overview or synthesis arises
● USA: Restatements by American Law Institute
○ Used in American law schools
● EU: Draft Common France of Reference
,What is tort law about?
● Tort = wrong
● Key question(s):
○ Do you have to (legally) pay compensation for damage you caused to someone
else?
○ Are you liable?
Examples:
- Injury caused by (traffic) accidents
- Injury caused by faulty products
- Exploding Coca Cola bottles
- Crimes, human rights violations
- Nuisance
- Loud noise
- Violation of privacy; injury to reputation
- Economic loss caused by unfair competition, patent infringement
- Injury caused by physical abuse, stalking
● Tort law has a wide scope of application: every-day issues are usually covered by this
Types of losses
Economic losses Non-economic losses
Types of negligence (carelessness)
1. Violation of statutory law
, a. Example: traffic laws
2. Unwritten rules of social conduct (focus)
Factors to consider:
- Other (external) contributions to damage
- Causality
‘Unwritten’ negligence
● art. VI.-3:102 (b) DCFR
● Violation of unwritten rules of social behaviour:
○ Conduct which does not amount to such case as could be expected from a
reasonably careful person in the circumstances of the case
- Decided not to establish a statutory provision for each situation; instead compare
conduct to reasonably careful person standard
- Criticism: people argued it violated the principle of legality
- Certainty can be found in court decisions/case law, not in statutes
Dangerous situations: what is negligent?
● Main question: did someone act negligently?
- Snow-covered steps
● What level of care is required?
● Is the municipality liable?
○ Yes, because…
■ Owner (municipality) has control over the state + quality of the
steps
■ Steps are open to the public
○ Counter-arguments
■ People can pay attention and notice the snowy steps
■ Snowy conditions are outside of the municipality’s control
● Did they act negligently or not?
○ Yes, however not fully as some of the fault can be blamed on the
individual (based on counter-arguments)
● Criteria:
○ Foreseeable harm/damage
- Lettuce leaf
● Is the shopkeeper liable on the basis of either breach of contract or tort?
, ○ Shop was liable, but victim only gets ⅓ of compensation due to
contributory negligence of victim
○ Court’s reasoning for judgement:
■ Shop must prove that the leaf has been on the floor for only short
period of time
● In order to prove the part of the floor was recently
checked and secured
■ Customer must take care, especially in the vegetable/fruit
department busy as it was a Friday afternoon
Criteria for negligence - What is negligence?
● Weighing factors:
1. Nature + extent of potential loss = L
a. Purely financial, physical injury, etc.
2. Probability of loss = P
3. Costs of preventive measures = C
a. These costs are usually less than having to compensate for the damage
caused as a result of a lack of safety measures
● Negligence is when L x P > C
Negligence: liability for intentional tort of somebody else
● Can you be liable if somebody else acted negligently?
- L’Olympique v. Fuster
● What level of care is required?
● Is the football club liable?
○ Yes, because…
■ Organizer of the event were under a duty to take adequate
security measures
■ There were 33.000 spectators
■ There were strong indications of violent incidents
■ Supporters of both teams were not seated at safe distance from
each other
■ No inspection to prevent spectators from carrying objects which
could cause injury
○ Counter-argument
■ There were many people; even if they had inspected there was
still a chance that some items would be missed
Voordelen van het kopen van samenvattingen bij Stuvia op een rij:
Verzekerd van kwaliteit door reviews
Stuvia-klanten hebben meer dan 700.000 samenvattingen beoordeeld. Zo weet je zeker dat je de beste documenten koopt!
Snel en makkelijk kopen
Je betaalt supersnel en eenmalig met iDeal, creditcard of Stuvia-tegoed voor de samenvatting. Zonder lidmaatschap.
Focus op de essentie
Samenvattingen worden geschreven voor en door anderen. Daarom zijn de samenvattingen altijd betrouwbaar en actueel. Zo kom je snel tot de kern!
Veelgestelde vragen
Wat krijg ik als ik dit document koop?
Je krijgt een PDF, die direct beschikbaar is na je aankoop. Het gekochte document is altijd, overal en oneindig toegankelijk via je profiel.
Tevredenheidsgarantie: hoe werkt dat?
Onze tevredenheidsgarantie zorgt ervoor dat je altijd een studiedocument vindt dat goed bij je past. Je vult een formulier in en onze klantenservice regelt de rest.
Van wie koop ik deze samenvatting?
Stuvia is een marktplaats, je koop dit document dus niet van ons, maar van verkoper annkathrindix03. Stuvia faciliteert de betaling aan de verkoper.
Zit ik meteen vast aan een abonnement?
Nee, je koopt alleen deze samenvatting voor €5,49. Je zit daarna nergens aan vast.
