1. Introduction
It was very nice weekend; therefore, we decided to go to the remote area of the city for swimming. I was driving the car in the city, and I recognized the traffic signal and I pressed the brake pedal and stopped my car. After a while, I heard that the car behind me severely smashed my car and caused a significant fear for all my family in the car as much as a certain damage on the back of my car. It was the first car accident I have ever had in my life. Thus, I did not know how to react and how to approach the person who damaged my car. I got out of the car, and recognized that there was a long left trace of the tires , say 20 meters, over the road because the driver was appeared to be speeding and careless in following the front car. The driver got out of the car, and approached me to ask, “Is this your first accident?” I said, “yes”. I understood that the driver had previous history of car accidents. Then, we called the police, and they prepared a report of the accident an hour later. I asked the police how to recover my damage because I was innocent. I was informed that the damage would have been recovered by the car insurance of the driver; therefore, I had to find a car repair shop for getting my car repaired together with the police inspection report.
1.2. Insurance: I found a car shop and left my car for a couple of days under the recommendation of my uncle, who was a police officer during the accident. The car repairer informed me that he would have nothing to repair unless the inspector of the insurance company completes the report of the car accident. Therefore, I had taken my car back one week later.
2. Negligence Analysis:
2.1. A
duty of care: Let’s take a look what
a duty of care means that is owed to foreseeable
plaintiff in order to prevent others from unreasonable risk of the economic
loss. As a professional driver, he has a
duty to act as a reasonably prudent driver in the same similar
circumstances. In this case, I will
elaborate whether I can be qualified to be a foreseeable plaintiff.
2.2. Breach
of that duty: Let’s review the breach that occurs when the defendant’s conduct falls below the standard of care
during his driving. In this case, I will propose my arguments in order to show
that the driver breached his standard of care because he was driving very fast
more than he was allowed to speed up (say more than 60 km/h); therefore, he was
unable to stop and ultimately crashed my car.
Hence, the report of the police showed he was fully responsible for the
car accident.
It clearly
shows that a breach of his duty is presently available under the Foreseeability
Test (FT) that is used to find an answer for a question whether the crash would
have not been conducted by a reasonable driver. The answer for raised question under the FT
is obviously positive since he was charged to be fully responsible by police
inspection of the car damage.
2.3.
Causation: The fact that
defendant did not live up his responsibility, negligence, caused a damage of my car and caused me not to use my
car at least for one week. Additionally,
he damaged the weekend plan of my family as much as he caused us to be
significantly afraid with a sudden car smash.
2.4. Damage: The damage caused here is both physical and mental. There is a significant loss of time even we have no physical damage since I was not able to use my car from my home to work; I had to waste my time due to fact that I had to use public transportation. In the meantime, the originality of my car was broken due to fact that some parts of my car were changed.
3. Conclusion
We have been significantly afraid
due to a sudden car crash, and I was unable to use my car as much as that my
car had a certain damage. Therefore, the
negligence of the driver owed me a duty of care that need being compensated.
NOT: 14 Haziran 2010 tarihinde, Kanada'da İŞ HUKUKU dersi kapsamında hazırladığım ESSAY. Risk Yönetimi ve Sigortacılık Diploma Programı kapsamında almam gereken bir dersti, oldukça zor geçen bir ders oldu.
No comments:
Post a Comment