Redress of the Costs Incurred Coursework

When shifting the costs from the victim to the respondent, then in one case the damages may be ascribed to a whole social group or community; in another case, particular individuals may be held responsible for indemnifying the losses; still, in another case, there could appear both of the aforementioned defendants. The controversial and disputable situations which ensue from a certain confusion and ambiguity in choosing the right defendant often present a stumbling block for a successful course of the case. Consequently, there arises a burning issue in the legal practice concerning the questions of who should bear the responsibility for causing the harm, what kind of responsibility should be imposed on the guilty party and which laws should be used as guidelines for deciding on the liable person, the type of liability and the resulting judgment of the court.

The present paper considers the case which clearly illustrates the difficulties concerning the choice of the defendant who would take on the duty to repair the wrongful losses. While being on vacation, a man decides to take part in a trail ride through a desert. The ride is sponsored and advertised by the posh resort which accommodates the holiday-makers, and the by that kind of travel is that of calm and peaceful observation of the local landscape. It especially suits the man in question as he has had no previous experience with horses the information which he readily shares with the guides, Ted and Rex, in order to secure a tranquil ride for himself. However, driven by their rollicking temper, the guides decide to play a joke on the novice and give him a which throws him down on the ground without any prior notice and runs off, back to her stables.

Such careless treatment of the in his several bones being broken and a concussion caused by the fall, which and creates the grounds for starting a legal procedure against the party at fault. However, one should bear in mind that despite the obvious and direct complicity of the two guides in the accident, there are two other possible defendants which could be subject to a judgment against them and bear the costs defrayed by the victim, and those are: the stable that employed the guides and the fashionable resort which advertised and attracted clients to the trail ride service. The aim would now be to make an attempt at defining the level of guilt of those parties and the corresponding level of their responsibility for the accident.

As the case in point concerns mostly private parties, the concepts and ideas of tort law appear to be most applicable here. Following the characteristics of by Coleman (2003), it can be assumed that this branch of civil law best suits the given case due to the fact that tort law considers

The question whether the costs are to be borne by victims or some other particular person or persons. Tort law is one of the institutions political communities develop in order to allow victims the opportunity to shift the costs that befall them to others.

Generally, a tort is a civil wrong that is legally recognized as a ground for court proceedings. The main objective of tort law, in contrast to criminal law, is not actually to punish the culprit, but mostly and primarily to relieve the victim of the damages incurred and to create a preventive environment that would help to avoid the same wrongs in the future. While tort law is based on the notion of a wrong the violation of a duty not to harm or not to impose risks of a certain kind on others (Coleman, 2003) it is necessary to bear in mind that not all wrongs are actually punishable. For the case to be reviewed under tort law, not only should a wrong be committed and the victim suffers, but the duty of care to the victim should also be violated by the defendant. Therefore, it is of foremost importance to establish whether the defendant was primarily responsible for not harming the others or not, and correspondingly, whether or not the defendant should be held liable for the misfortune.