1

Tort Law of Negligence

By general meaning, The Tort of Negligence is a legal wrong that is

experienced by someone at the cost of another who fails to take proper precaution to avoid

what a reasonable person would regard as a foreseeable risk. Usually, there will be a

contractual relationship (express or implied) between the parties involved, such as that of

doctor and patient, employer and employee, vendor and buyer, and recently it was necessary

for such a contractual relationship to exist in order for a claim for negligence to succeed

(Stuhmcke and Corporation, 2001).

In the Civil Code of the Philippines, Chapter 2, Art. 20, It introduces a wider

concept of torts in Philippines, for it embraces:

a. The Spanish tort- based on negligence

b. American tort- based on malice.

Torts are legal or civil actions wrongfully committed against people or organizations,

causing them a loss or disadvantage. Intentional torts are willful acts or the willful failure

to act when needed to do so that causes injury to someone else. Thus, crime is a specific type

of intentional tort. Other types of intentional torts include slander and libel, patent

infringement, and false imprisonment. Torts result either because the tortfeasor, who is the

one who commits the tort, is either negligent in his duties that are inflicted by law and not

contract, making someone else a loss, or causes a loss through his actions. 

1
2

Negligence is the failure to perform the required amount of care or

precaution to prevent injury to others. For example, if you cause an accident that injures

someone or dies because you didn’t perform enough precaution as a doctor or nurse. This is

specifically called as Medical Negligence if it happens involving a medical professional.

Sometimes, the act itself determines negligence. Under the doctrine of res ipsa

loquitur, (Latin term for "the thing speaks for itself"), there are some actions so openly

negligent that the law presumes negligence, such as when a surgeon operates on the wrong

side of the body. The defendant, in such cases, must prove that he wasn't negligent.

Before a court will award damages, the presumed negligence must satisfy 4 requirements:

1.      there must be a legal duty to perform or to use reasonable care;

2.      there must have been a failure to perform that duty;

3.      the plaintiff must have suffered an injury or a loss;

4.      and the negligent act must have been the proximate cause of the injury.

The proximate cause is a cause that directly caused the loss or suffering; the rule is,

if the proximate cause wasn’t caused , then the harm would not have happened.

All 4 elements of negligence must be present before a court will award damages.

2
3

Gross negligence means conduct or a failure to act that is so indiscreetly so

that it shows a considerable or absolute lack of concern for whether an injury will outcome.

It is sometimes needed to establish "gross negligence" as opposed to "ordinary negligence"

in order to overcome a legal impediment to a lawsuit. For example, a government employee

who has immunity from liability for ordinary negligence, but may remain liable for gross

negligence.

Sources:

https://www.lawteacher.net/free-law-essays/tort-law/tort-of-negligence.php

https://jaysoncivil.blogspot.com/2011/09/main-topic-sub-topic-normal-0-false.html

I have these sources as references but I revised most of the words used here so they’re not

plagiarized. I just got the main ideas.