Summary
David, a police officer, bears a grudge against Tobias and shoots him during a raid, leading to a delictual claim. Davids conduct is wrongful due to personal grudge and excessive force. In _Minister van Polisie v Ewels_, the court accepted that legal convictions of the community are those of legal policymakers. Tumi, an epilepsy sufferer, cannot rely on automatism for a delictual action as he negligently placed himself in a risky situation. For Ronnies claim against the Cape Town Metro, the traditional approach to wrongfulness is a breach of a legal duty. Amos, who injured Benedict while being threatened, may rely on private defense.Full Conversation
****
Thank you for the detailed information. Based on the situation you described, David may rely on the following defense:
**b. No ground of justification is applicable; David’s conduct is wrongful.**
Given the personal grudge and the excessive use of force, David's actions appear to be wrongful.
If you have any further questions or need more assistance, please let me know.
In which one of the following cases did the court accept the view that the legal convictions of the community must be seen as the legal convictions of the legal policy makers of the community, such as the legislature and the judges?
a.
_Schultz v Butt_ * * SA * (A).
b.
_Minister van Polisie v Ewels_ * * SA * (A).
c.
_Le Roux v Dey_ * * SA * (CC).
d.
_Telematrix (Pty) Ltd t/a Matrix Vehicle Tracking v Advertising Standards Authority SA_ * * SA * (SCA).
The case where the court accepted the view that the legal convictions of the community must be seen as the legal convictions of the legal policy makers of the community, such as the legislature and the judges, is:
**b. _Minister van Polisie v Ewels_ * * SA * (A).**
If you have any further questions or need more assistance, please let me know.
Tumi is an epilepsy sufferer. He neglects to take his prescription medicine and decides to drive to the local mall to do some shopping. On his way, he suffers an epileptic seizure. He loses control of his car and smashes into a corner shop, causing considerable damage to the building and merchandise. The shop owner institutes a delictual action against Tumi. Which one of the following statements is correct?
a.
Tumi can escape liability by relying on automatism_._
b.
Tumi cannot rely on automatism because he negligently placed himself in a situation where his movements were mechanical_._
c.
Tumi cannot rely on automatism because the defence _actio libera in causa _applies_._
d.
Tumi can escape liability by proving that his bodily movements were not voluntary at the time when the damage was caused_._
Thank you for your detailed information. Based on the situation described, the most accurate legal statement is:
**b. Tumi cannot rely on automatism because he negligently placed himself in a situation where his movements were mechanical.**
If you have any further questions or need more assistance, please let me know.
The Cape Town Metro has neglected to keep a popular seaside promenade in a good condition. Due to weathering, the surface of the promenade has become uneven. During a pre-dawn run, Ronnie trips and falls when running over crumbling paving on the promenade. He breaks his right arm and his face hits a bench. If Ronnie wishes to institute a delictual claim against the Metro, the question whether the Metro’s conduct was wrongful will, according to the traditional approach to wrongfulness, be answered with reference to the following (select the best option):
a.
Whether it would be reasonable to hold the Metro liable.
b.
Infringement of a subjective right.
c.
The reasonable person test.
d.
Breach of a legal duty.
Based on the information provided, the question whether the Metro’s conduct was wrongful will, according to the traditional approach to wrongfulness, be answered with reference to the following:
**d. Breach of a legal duty.**
If you have any further questions or need more assistance, please let me know.
Amos directs his pistol at Benedict and threatens to shoot him. Benedict grabs Amos’ arm to prevent Amos from shooting him. To loosen his arm from Benedict’s grip, Amos jabs Benedict in the rib cage with his elbow and cracks one of Benedict’s ribs. Benedict institutes a claim against Amos for the medical treatment for the injury to his rib. Amos may rely on the following as defence:
a.
Necessity.
b.
Private defence.
c.
Provocation.
d.
No defence is applicable; Amos’ conduct is wrongful.
Amos directs his pistol at Benedict and threatens to shoot him. Benedict grabs Amos’ arm to prevent Amos from shooting him. To loosen his arm from Benedict’s grip, Amos jabs Benedict in the rib cage with his elbow and cracks one of Benedict’s ribs. Benedict institutes a claim against Amos for the medical treatment for the injury to his rib. Amos may rely on the following as defence:
a.
Necessity.
b.
Private defence.
c.
Provocation.
d.
No defence is applicable; Amos’ conduct is wrongful.
TRY ME!
Ask Your Question For Free