If my law assignment was given bad marks, and it was because I didn't get proper facts right from the lecturer cause she was a little inconsistent at certain points, can she be sued for contributory negligence?
Probably not. You see, the lecturer in question, is part of a bigger body known as the company, in which case her contract lies under the school. Which means instead of Andrew v Lecturer, it'll be Andrew v School. Such is seen in the case of Salomon v A Salomon & Co Ltd(1897) where the court mentions that the plaintiff could sue the defendant only as a company, but not as an individual entity.
And probably, from the school's point of view, I have not broken a condition. The lecturer has, after all, taught all the lessons given to us. Even if it was a breach in condition, terminating the contract would mean I prolly won't get my degree, so why would I wanna take action on such a thing?
So was there a breach in warranty then? Could I claim general damages?
But wait, what if the school has a disclaimer saying that they will not be reliable for the student's grades? It doesn't exactly fall under UCTA so that means it's pretty safe from scruitiny. -\
And worse still, what if they use Volenti as their defense, claiming that me getting into this course meant that I knew that there were chances of doing badly in my assignment?
What then, will be of my argument towards the defendant?
Isn't the law such a complicated topic?
More importantly, could I have probably spent all this time typing this nonsense to have popped another 1-2 paragraphs in my assignment paper?
yes...yes I think I could have.
No comments:
Post a Comment