Negligence as a Tort

Introduction

Negligence, in simple terms, is the failure to exercise due care and caution in performing a duty. It occurs when someone does not act as a reasonable person would, leading to harm or injury to another. To classify an act as negligent, certain factors must be present:

• The defendant owed a duty of care to the plaintiff.
• The defendant breached that duty.
• The plaintiff suffered harm or damage due to the defendant’s actions.

A classic case illustrating negligence is Donoghue v. Stevenson, commonly known as the "ginger beer case." In this case, the plaintiff suffered illness after consuming contaminated beer that contained a snail. The beer was in an opaque bottle, making it impossible for the plaintiff or the seller to detect the contamination. The court established a guiding principle to determine liability in such cases.

Duty of Care Towards the Plaintiff

To establish the defendant's liability, the plaintiff must first prove that the defendant owed them a duty of care. In Donoghue v. Stevenson, the court ruled that the manufacturer was responsible for ensuring the safety of the product, thereby recognizing a duty of care towards consumers.

Breach of Duty of Care

The plaintiff must then demonstrate that the defendant breached this duty of care through an act of negligence—either by doing something carelessly or by failing to act appropriately. In the aforementioned case, the presence of the snail in the beer showed that the manufacturer had failed in its duty to ensure the product’s safety.

Damage Suffered Due to Breach of Duty

The plaintiff must also prove that the damage or harm suffered was a direct result of the defendant’s breach of duty. The harm must be foreseeable to establish negligence. In Donoghue v. Stevenson, the plaintiff’s illness was a foreseeable consequence of consuming contaminated beer, directly linked to the manufacturer’s negligence.

Negligence as Defined and Penalized by Criminal Law in India

In India, negligence is considered a serious offense under criminal law, punishable under Section 304A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), 1860. This section addresses cases where death results from a rash or negligent act that does not amount to culpable homicide or murder due to the absence of intent to kill. Section 304A was introduced in 1870 to fill a gap in the law where deaths were caused by negligence, but without the intent necessary for charges under Section 299 (culpable homicide) or Section 300 (murder). The section excludes acts considered accidents under Section 80 of the IPC, as the recklessness involved suggests an awareness of potential harm.

Medical Negligence

Medical negligence occurs when a healthcare professional fails to provide the standard of care expected in their field, leading to harm or death. In such cases, the burden of proof lies with the plaintiff, who must show that the medical professional deviated from accepted practices.

Key Cases in Medical Negligence

• Poonam Verma v. Ashwin Singh: In this case, a homeopathic doctor administered allopathic medicines. The court held that deviation from established medical practice constitutes negligence, especially when it violates professional standards.
• Jacob Mathew v. State of Punjab: This case involved a doctor accused of negligence that resulted in the death of the plaintiff’s brother due to a delay in administering oxygen. The court ruled that a professional who fails to meet the standard of care expected in their field can be held liable for negligence.

Conclusion

Negligence as a tort involves a breach of duty that results in harm to another person. Whether it occurs in everyday situations or in professional settings like healthcare, the law holds individuals and entities accountable for failing to act with the care and caution that is reasonably expected.