Responsabilidad civil de la persona mayor incapaz y de sus guardadores por los daños causados a terceros: especial referencia a la responsabilidad del incapaz en el sistema del Common Law

Un número considerable de personas mayores padece alguna enfermedad neurodegenerativa que limita sus facultades intelectivas y volitivas, lo que en la práctica suele traducirse en alteraciones de la personalidad con conservación de consciencia, pérdidas de memoria, desorientación, inquietud, confusión o agresividad. Este deterioro progresivo de capacidad que puede afectar a nuestros mayores no sólo los convierte en fácil objetivo de agresiones sino también en potenciales creadores de riesgos y daños a terceros. Es precisamente la responsabilidad que puede derivarse de tales daños la que será analizada en primer lugar en esta sede, exponiendo el estado de la cuestión tanto en el civil como en el common law. Por otro lado, cuando una persona que tiene sus funciones cognitivas mermadas causa un daño a otro, no sólo se debe analizar la responsabilidad civil del propio agente del daño frente al perjudicado, sino también aquélla en que podría incurrir la persona encargada de su cuidado en caso de haberla. Dicha cuestión ocupará la segunda parte del presente trabajo.

Behaviour disorders and teacher negligence

The purpose of this paper is to examine the legal implications of the continuing rise in the number of school children diagnosed with behaviour disorders. Not only are teachers now subject to a dense grid of legal regulation, they are also increasingly vulnerable to actions in tort. It will be argued here that as more and more children are labelled ‘disordered’, the duty of care become more onerous, and hence harder for teachers to meet. As a consequence, teachers are more likely to face claims of negligence. It is concluded that while the schooling system needs to retain a healthy scepticism about each new pathologising disorder that seeks special status for its sufferers, it also needs to provide greater training and resources for teachers regarding disorder management. It is also concluded that recent changes to negligence law regarding the issue of ‘reasonable foreseeability’ within breach of duty of care, may not be as significant as might have been hoped by the teaching community. Indeed, the elevated standard of care required by the increasing numbers of disordered pupils, places teachers in an ever more difficult legal position.

Setting limits to teacher responsibility

The purpose of this article is to raise some concerns over ongoing changes to the nature and scope of the teaching profession. Teaching is a responsible profession, and teachers have always been charged with the job of turning out the next generation of citizens—educated, healthy in mind, and healthy in body. The question is: how far should this responsibility extend? Just what should schools be responsible for? This article proposes some limits to teacher responsibility.

Too great expectations?

Teachers have always been charged with the task of turning out the next generation of citizens—educated, healthy in mind, and healthy in body. The central question here is: how far should this responsibility extend? Just how much can we reasonably expect teachers to be responsible for? And just what should schools be responsible for? Obviously, teachers ought to be responsible for the fundamentals of learning, but should they be held accountable for what the children eat, or how they choose to behave, or for every single risk, direct or indirect, that could conceivably occur within the school grounds? These are precisely the kinds of expectation that have become part of educational life. Bit by bit, new forms of responsibility are being added to the site of the school and, more specifically, to the professional life of the teacher. The intention here is not necessarily to challenge any of these diverse changes, but rather to express concern about their cumulative effect on the ability of the school to do its primary job effectively.

Behaviour disorders and the negligent teacher

The purpose of this paper is to examine the legal implications of the continuing rise in the number of school children diagnosed with behaviour disorders. Not only are teachers now subject to a dense grid of legal regulation, they are also increasingly vulnerable to actions in tort. It will be argued here that as more and more children are labelled ‘disordered’, then the concomitant duty of care requirements for teachers becomes more onerous. As a consequence, teachers are less likely to be able to defend themselves against claims of negligence. It is concluded that while the schooling system needs to retain a healthy scepticism about each new pathologising disorder that seeks special status for its sufferers, it also needs to provide greater training and resources for teachers regarding disorder management. It is also concluded that recent changes to negligence law regarding the issue of ‘reasonable foreseeability’ within breach of duty of care, may not be as significant as might have been hoped by the teaching community. Indeed, the elevated standard of care, as required by increasing numbers of disordered pupils, place teachers in an ever more difficult legal position.

Calligraphy and causation : two obstetric management cases - Hirst v Sydney South West Area Health and King v Western Sydney local health network

Two recent decisions of the Supreme Court of New South Wales in the context of obstetric management have highlighted firstly, the importance of keeping legible, accurate and detailed medical records; and secondly, the challenges faced by those seeking to establish causation, particularly where epidemiological evidence is relied upon...

Duty and control in intermediary copyright liability: An Australian perspective

In the internet age, copyright owners are increasingly looking to online intermediaries to take steps to prevent copyright infringement. Sometimes these intermediaries are closely tied to the acts of infringement; sometimes – as in the case of ISPs – they are not. In 2012, the Australian High Court decided the Roadshow Films v iiNet case, in which it held that an Australian ISP was not liable under copyright’s authorization doctrine, which asks whether the intermediary has sanctioned, approved or countenanced the infringement. The Australian Copyright Act 1968 directs a court to consider, in these situations, whether the intermediary had the power to prevent the infringement and whether it took any reasonable steps to prevent or avoid the infringement. It is generally not difficult for a court to find the power to prevent infringement – power to prevent can include an unrefined technical ability to disconnect users from the copyright source, such as an ISP terminating users’ internet accounts. In the iiNet case, the High Court eschewed this broad approach in favor of focusing on a notion of control that was influenced by principles of tort law. In tort, when a plaintiff asserts that a defendant should be liable for failing to act to prevent harm caused to the plaintiff by a third party, there is a heavy burden on the plaintiff to show that the defendant had a duty to act. The duty must be clear and specific, and will often hinge on the degree of control that the defendant was able to exercise over the third party. Control in these circumstances relates directly to control over the third party’s actions in inflicting the harm. Thus, in iiNet’s case, the control would need to be directed to the third party’s infringing use of BitTorrent; control over a person’s ability to access the internet is too imprecise. Further, when considering omissions to act, tort law differentiates between the ability to control and the ability to hinder. The ability to control may establish a duty to act, and the court will then look to small measures taken to prevent the harm to determine whether these satisfy the duty. But the ability to hinder will not suffice to establish liability in the absence of control. This article argues that an inquiry grounded in control as defined in tort law would provide a more principled framework for assessing the liability of passive intermediaries in copyright. In particular, it would set a higher, more stable benchmark for determining the copyright liability of passive intermediaries, based on the degree of actual, direct control that the intermediary can exercise over the infringing actions of its users. This approach would provide greater clarity and consistency than has existed to date in this area of copyright law in Australia.

Duty and Control in Intermediary Copyright Liability: An Australian Perspective

In the internet age, copyright owners are increasingly looking to online intermediaries to take steps to prevent copyright infringement. Sometimes these intermediaries are closely tied to the acts of infringement; sometimes – as in the case of ISPs – they are not. In 2012, the Australian High Court decided the Roadshow Films v iiNet case, in which it held that an Australian ISP was not liable under copyright’s authorization doctrine, which asks whether the intermediary has sanctioned, approved or countenanced the infringement. The Australian Copyright Act 1968 directs a court to consider, in these situations, whether the intermediary had the power to prevent the infringement and whether it took any reasonable steps to prevent or avoid the infringement. It is generally not difficult for a court to find the power to prevent infringement – power to prevent can include an unrefined technical ability to disconnect users from the copyright source, such as an ISP terminating users’ internet accounts. In the iiNet case, the High Court eschewed this broad approach in favor of focusing on a notion of control that was influenced by principles of tort law. In tort, when a plaintiff asserts that a defendant should be liable for failing to act to prevent harm caused to the plaintiff by a third party, there is a heavy burden on the plaintiff to show that the defendant had a duty to act. The duty must be clear and specific, and will often hinge on the degree of control that the defendant was able to exercise over the third party. Control in these circumstances relates directly to control over the third party’s actions in inflicting the harm. Thus, in iiNet’s case, the control would need to be directed to the third party’s infringing use of BitTorrent; control over a person’s ability to access the internet is too imprecise. Further, when considering omissions to act, tort law differentiates between the ability to control and the ability to hinder. The ability to control may establish a duty to act, and the court will then look to small measures taken to prevent the harm to determine whether these satisfy the duty. But the ability to hinder will not suffice to establish liability in the absence of control. This chapter argues that an inquiry grounded in control as defined in tort law would provide a more principled framework for assessing the liability of passive intermediaries in copyright. In particular, it would set a higher, more stable benchmark for determining the copyright liability of passive intermediaries, based on the degree of actual, direct control that the intermediary can exercise over the infringing actions of its users. This approach would provide greater clarity and consistency than has existed to date in this area of copyright law in Australia.

Personal Injury Liability in Sport: Emerging Trends

Violent play during the course of a game or sport is not a new phenomenon; accompanying legal proceedings are. This article considers personal injury liability for injuries inflicted by a participant upon an opponent during a sporting pursuit. The jurisdictional focus is on England and Wales. The sporting emphasis of the article is on competitive, body contact games. The legal emphasis is on the tort of negligence. Analogous to the law of criminal assault, breach of "implied sporting consent" or the volenti of the claimant will be seen as central in application, as assessed through a number of objective criteria, including the skill level of the injuring party and whether that defendant was acting in "reckless disregard" of the claimant's safety. These criteria or evidential guidelines, which emerge from a careful doctrinal analysis of the relevant case law, are seen as crucial to the examination of the appropriate degree of care in negligence within the prevailing circumstances of sport. The article also searches for some theoretical coherency within the case law, premising it on Fletcher's idea of reciprocal risk-taking. In addition, the underlying policy-related issue of sport's social utility is discussed, as are practical matters relating to vicarious liability, insurance and the measure of damages for "lost sporting opportunity". Moreover, it will be shown that personal injury claims relating to sports participant liability now extend to a consideration of the duties of coaches, referees, sports governing bodies and schools. Finally, this article is set against the backdrop of an apparently spiralling "compensation culture" and the concomitant threat that that "blame culture" poses for the future promotion, operation and administration of sport.

Responding to crisis: When the telephone fails

The world is changing. Advances in telecommunications have meant that the world is shrinking – data can be moved across continents in the time it takes to send an email or access the cloud. Although developments such as these highlight the extent of scientific and technological evolution, in terms of legal liability, questions must be asked as to the capacity of our legal structures to evolve accordingly.

This article looks at how emergency telephone provision and any shift to VoIP systems might fit with existing tort liability and associated duty implications. It does so by analysing the technology through the principles that signpost UK tort law. This article recognises that as an emerging area, the legal liability implications have not yet been discussed in any great detail. The aim of this article therefore is to introduce the area, encourage debate and consider the issues that may become increasingly relevant as these types of technologies become industrial standards.

A tutela preventiva da responsabilidade civil

The contemporary society is characterized by high risks. Today, the prevention of damages is as important as compensation. This is due to the fact that the potentiality of several damages is not in line with compensation, because often compensation proves to be impossible. Civil law should be at the service of the citizens, which explains that the heart of the institution of non-contractual liability has gradually moved towards the victim's protection. It is requested from Tort law an active attitude that seeks to avoid damages, reducing its dimension and frequency. The imputation by risk proves to be necessary and useful in the present context as it demonstrates the ability to model behaviors, functioning as a warning for agents engaged in hazardous activities. Economically, it seeks to prevent socially inefficient behaviors. Strict liability assumes notorious importance as a deterrent and in the dispersion of damage by society. The paradigm of the imputation founded on fault has proved insufficient for the effective protection of the interests of the citizens, particularly if based in an anachronistic vision of the concept of fault. Prevention arises in several areas, especially in environmental liability, producer liability and liability based on infringement of copyright and rights relating to the personality. To overcome the damage as the gauge for compensation does not inevitably mean the recognition of the punitive approach. Prevention should not be confused with reactive/punitive objectives. The deterrence of unlawful conduct is not subordinated to punishment.

Le transfert de documents conformes et la résolution du contrat pour leur non-conformité selon la convention de Vienne sur la vente internationale de marchandises

La présente étude examine une des difficultés que soulève l'exécution des contrats de vente mettant en relation des parties situées dans des pays différents. Ces contrats connaissent des problèmes bien particuliers. En effet, en donnant lieu à l'expédition des marchandises vendues, ces contrats obligent aussi le vendeur à transférer à l'acheteur les documents conformes représentatifs de celles-ci. La non-conformité des documents se distingue de la non-conformité des marchandises et constitue une source principale des litiges visant la résolution des contrats dans ce secteur commercial. La diversité des solutions susceptibles de s'y appliquer est devenue une réalité depuis que les droits internes doivent coexister avec les règles de la Convention de Vienne sur la vente internationale de marchandises. En principe, aucune difficulté ne se pose lorsqu'un droit interne est désigné comme étant le droit compétent: il suffirait d'appliquer les solutions de ce droit. Ainsi, par exemple, l'acheteur peut résoudre le contrat si les documents ne sont pas conformes aux stipulations contractuelles sur la base du concept de fundamental breach (en cas de vente non documentaire) ou sur la base de la stricte conformité (en cas de vente documentaire) que retiennent les droits anglo-américain; en revanche dans les systèmes de droit civil (où la distinction entre vente documentaire et vente non documentaire n'existe pas), pareille résolution du contrat basée sur le défaut de conformité des documents n'est possible qu'en présence d'un préjudice important ou d'un défaut majeur. Plusieurs justifications fondamentales sous-tendent la raison d'être des solutions retenues par les droits nationaux: quête de sécurité juridique et recherche de solution conforme aux besoins des opérateurs du commerce international. Néanmoins, il appert que de telles justifications sont également présentes dans la Convention de Vienne. De plus, cette Convention oblige le vendeur à transférer à l'acheteur les documents conformes de la vente. Cependant, elle le fait de manière indirecte sans pour autant préciser quels types de documents doivent faire l'objet du transfert. L'opportunité d'un tel transfert dépendra donc, sous réserves des dispositions impératives, de l'accord des parties et des usages commerciaux qui ont préséance sur les règles unifiées. Ce qui en fait parfois une question d'interprétation du contrat ou une question de comblement des lacunes de ce droit uniforme de la vente internationale. En ce sens, ce dernier droit diffère des droits nationaux qui sont plus clairs à cet égard. Quant aux conditions de la résolution du contrat pour non-conformité des documents, quel que soit le système national considéré, la solution qu'il consacre contraste avec celle prévue par la Convention de Vienne qui n'admet une telle sanction qu'en présence d'une contravention essentielle. Cette dualité entre droits nationaux et droit matériel uniforme nous met en face d'un constat bien évident: l'avènement de la Convention de Vienne sur la vente internationale de marchandises et la règle de la contravention essentielle qu'elle consacre, perturbent le paysage juridique jusqu'ici en vigueur dans chacun des États signataires. Ce qui justifie tout l'intérêt du sujet: la contravention essentielle par opposition à la règle de la stricte conformité et celle basée sur l'importance du préjudice prévues par les droits internes sont-elles des règles exclusives l'une de l'autre? La réponse est loin d'être certaine en dépit des convergences possibles dans le dénouement du contentieux de la résolution, même si par ailleurs il faut admettre qu'il s'agit de régimes juridiques bien différents. Tout en subordonnant la résolution du contrat à l'existence d'une contravention essentielle, lorsque la Convention de Vienne s'applique (DEUXIÈME PARTIE), la présente étude propose une interprétation de celle-ci en examinant son contenu ainsi que les différentes sources qui interfèrent dans sa mise en œuvre afin de démontrer que ce droit uniforme, malgré ses limites, régit les aspects documentaires de la vente internationale (PREMIÈRE PARTIE).