Torts STS - Questions by Edie McAsey https://padlet.com/emcasey2/wu2cx3mepsw6hyy1 Thread any Torts related questions here, and I'll do my best to get to them within a few days :) (You won't see your question as a post immediately as it needs to be approved!) en-us 2023-03-15 11:30:29 UTC 2026-01-26 02:18:04 UTC hello@padlet.com hi, im a bit confused with how the Wyong city council fits into this course. could you highlight the key takeaways and what the case teaches us (like in what context we could cite it as authority)? thanks https://padlet.com/emcasey2/wu2cx3mepsw6hyy1/wish/2554324108 2023-04-14 08:51:24 UTC https://padlet.com/emcasey2/wu2cx3mepsw6hyy1/wish/2554324108 https://padlet.com/emcasey2/wu2cx3mepsw6hyy1/wish/2603084505 Hi, 
Firstly, thank you for the videos - they are super helpful!!!
I just had a question about voluntary assumption of risk. In Giumelli, it was established that the onus is on defendant to prove the plaintiff consented to the contact. However, this is changed in statute at S54(1) - where the onus is on the plaintiff to prove they were not aware of the obvious risk? I am just a bit confused about this. Do we just follow the statute? Or is the difference about the fact that Giumelli is not related to an 'obvious risk'?
Thank you!]]> 2023-05-24 09:54:13 UTC https://padlet.com/emcasey2/wu2cx3mepsw6hyy1/wish/2603084505 https://padlet.com/emcasey2/wu2cx3mepsw6hyy1/wish/2611585383 1) Im a bit confused about consequential mental harm and how we answer a question about it. What is the difference between the way in which we apply the facts for S74(1)(a) and 74(1)(b)? I know S74(1)(b) is about a person of less than normal fortitude - what is it more specific to the plaintiff than 74(1)(a)? Also, could you give an example of how we would conclude a consequential mental harm problem - I don't know how I would word an answer about this. Also how does the egg-shell skull apply to consequential mental harm?

 2) Also, for NIA's, for negligence by the plaintiff to themselves, how would we word the reasonable foreseeability test? Is it still about the class of people of which the plaintiff belongs to? So would it be - is it reasonably foreseeable that harm would occur to the a class of people of which the plaintiff belongs if the plaintiff did not take reasonable care? Does the far-fetched and fanciful principle apply?

3) For breach for a public authority how do we use -  s84(2) - The act or omission of a statutory power by a public authority will not constitute a breach unless it would be considered so unreasonable that no public authority with similar functions would consider it reasonable?

4) For breach and duty for a public authority how do we use S83 and 85? How would we talk about these provisions in each section? 



]]> 2023-06-01 08:49:02 UTC https://padlet.com/emcasey2/wu2cx3mepsw6hyy1/wish/2611585383