Friday, July 26, 2019

Mitchell v Glasgow City Council Case Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 words - 24

Mitchell v Glasgow City Council Case - Essay Example Unfortunate facts are common with most of the leading cases, especially based on the delict law. This is particularly true as seen in Mitchell v Glasgow City Council case. James Mitchell is a tenant under the housing local authority has a neighbor by the name Drummond James. Drummond becomes an antisocial neighbor, who ends up a total threat to Mr. Mitchell James. In December 1994, a conflict arose between Mitchell and Drummond due to issues of noise. At this point, Drummond went ahead to bang Mr., Mitchells door using an iron bar and also had the windows of the house smashed. This was the beginning of Mitchell’s horror with Drummond, who openly insulted him and at the same time issued threats to have him dead. James Mitchell suffered an attack from James Drummond. Mitchell suffered injuries that were severe enough to cause his death. The verbal abuses went on for a period of 6 Â ½ years. (ROBERT, 2009). He later killed him in 2001. It is at this point that the council of Glasgow took an initiative to have eviction proceeds against Drummond. Just before, the assault, Drummond got a summon from the council. It was then that he went back and committed the crime which took away Mitchell's life. Mitchell’s daughter together with her mum, Mitchell’s wife filed a case against the Glasgow council for negligence that resulted in the loss of Mr. Mitchell. The law does not impose a duty that is positive to have someone protect other people; and duty to have a person prevented from any form of harm emanating from any form of criminality on the basis of foreseeing its possibility. On the contrary, the harm that is foreseen is in it is not weighty enough to have the duty of care imposition. Therefore, this acted in the disfavor of Mitchell’s family. Ratio refers to reasons given to arrive at a certain decision. They offer a binding precedent that is to say that the courts under in terms of the hierarchy structure, have to follow the same in case a similar case arises and the same presented to them.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.