Search

The author comments on the article "Improving Jurors' Evaluations of Auditors in Negligence Cases," by Kathryn Kadous. The article examined the effect of bias on jurors' decisions on negligence cases involving auditors. Kadous' article also proposed a theoretical framework for the possible influence of knowledge of a negative outcome on the evaluative judgments of jurors in an auditor negligence trial. The author expresses his concerns about the article's theoretical background, experimental design, and analysis of results.

Copyright of Contemporary Accounting Research is the property of Canadian Academic Accounting Association and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The article discusses the effects of gross criminal negligence on professional tribunals. Topics discussed include information on the gross negligence manslaughter; need of professional standards and conduct in medical practice; and the death of the victim due to the breach of duty and the patient safety culture.

The article discusses the court case Aydogdu versus Turkey wherein a Turkish couple complained that their premature baby was deprived of vital emergency care due to structural deficiencies in public hospitals.

The article reports decision of different U.S. courts in different cases, as of December 2015. Several cases discussed include 'United States v. Taylor' related to federal sentencing; "Edwards v. Arkansas Department of Human Services" concerning Arkansas Rule of Civil Procedure; and "Gill v. State" related to conviction for criminal negligence.

The article offers information on the history, drawbacks and legal reforms to prosecution of manslaughter by criminal negligence of physicians in various jurisdictions in Australia. It discusses the case of Jayant Patel, the Director of Surgery at Bundaberg Base Hospital, Queensland, which reflects prosecutorial failure of the criminal justice system of Australia to address the fraud charges associated with deaths.

The article discusses the lawsuit HKSAR v. Lai Shui Yin related to gross negligence manslaughter (GNM) in Hong Kong, China. Topics discussed include importance of mens rea in issues related to GNM, imposition of mandatory lengthy sentences in the cases of GNM, and issues of recklessness associated with GNM in comparison to gross negligence.

The article discusses corporate criminal liability and crimes such as price fixing which are committed by corporate senior officers in Canada as of January 2014, focusing on criminal negligence and the corporate liability provisions of Canada's Criminal Code. The vicarious liability legal principle is mentioned, along with several criminal law cases involving entities such as Metron Construction Corp. and Pétroles Global Inc. Corporate compliance systems and agency law are also examined.

The article discusses the changes in the Singapore law on occupiers' liability with the recent Court of Appeal decision in Toh Siew Kee v. Ho Ah Lam Ferrocement (Pte) Ltd. It discusses the two changes in the law including no longer a distinction between invitees and licensees and occupiers' liability under the tort of negligence. It discusses the High Court's decision in which the Justice Woo Bih Li dismissed all the claims related to See Toh (C.A.).

James Badenoch QC asks whether it is right that members of the medical profession should be subject to litigation when things go wrong. Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article compares laws related to the liability in negligence for third party criminal acts in the U.S. and Australia, as of May 2013. Topics discussed include High Court of Australia in the case 'Modbury Triangle Shopping Centre Pty. Ltd. v Anzil;' the U.S. court case 'MacPherson v. Buick Motor Company' and 'Donoghue v. Stevenson;' and Australian and American common law on liability for criminal acts of third parties.

The author examines the impact of the Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Act 2007, which came into effect in April 2008. He analyzes the decision of the Manchester Crown Court in R v Lion Steel Equipment Ltd., which indicates worrying clues about the manner in which courts will approach the imposition of fines. The author also discusses other court cases which covered the issue of level of fines.

The article discusses a court case of King v. The Queen wherein the plaintiff was convicted for culpable driving leading into death. The issues related to criminal negligence were considered along with lesser alternative verdict and the considerations by the trial jury. The decisions made by the Court of Appeals wherein the court dismissed the plaintiff's application for leave to appeal are also discussed.

The article discusses the court cases Williams & others v Fred Olsen Cruise Lines Ltd. and Sewell v Saga Holidays wherein the principle res ipsa loquitur in the law of negligence of duty was applied in both cases. The court held that the defendants are liable for their failure to provide passenger safety and accident prevention measures. It considers the incident of the Costa Concordia cruise ship which suggests that the cruise industry should set safety standards and risk management strategies.

The High Court has reserved judgment in an appeal against the decision of the Western Australian Court of Appeal in Miller v Miller (2009) 54 MVR 367. This appeal calls into question the defence of joint illegal enterprise, which is an answer to liability in the tort of negligence. It is with this appeal that this article is concerned. Two main arguments are presented. The first is that the defence is framed in a highly unsatisfactory way. It is governed by nonsensical rules, many of which are inconsistent with fundamental principles of tort law. Accordingly, should the High Court retain the defence, it is submitted that it should reformulate it so that it blends in with the legal environment in which it resides. The second and more fundamental argument is that the defence should be abolished. It is a stain on the law of torts. Not only are there no convincing arguments in support of it, but there are powerful reasons against its existence. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article focuses on the criminal negligence under clean water act (CWA) with reference to the case United States v. Edward Hanousek. Edward Hanousek discontinued the preventive measures in the pipeline construction, which led to accidental discharge of around 1000 to 5000 gallons of oil in Skagway River. It is stated that for any environmental criminal investigation, charges should be filed in such a manner that if proven guilty the perpetrator can not find a legal escape.

The study, first published in 2004, looks at databases on clinical negligence litigation, what kind of claims for clinical negligence there have been, and studies cases in different settings such as general practice, general surgery and medicine, psychiatry and obstetrics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses the court case R. v. Evans involving Gemma Evans and her mother, Andrea Townsend, who were convicted of the gross negligence manslaughter of the former's 16-year-old half sister, Carly Townsend. Carly died due to a heroin overdose at Andrea's home. Evans, who received a four-year custodial sentence, appealed based on the grounds that the trial judge was wrong to have directed the jury that it was a situation capable of giving rise to a duty of care.

The article presents an analysis of the European Court of Justice's (ECJ) judgment regarding the Framework Decision on ship-source pollution. A summary of the case wherein the European Commission took legal action under Article 35(6) EU, to strengthen an existing criminal law involving the enforcement of ship-source pollution, is also presented. The Framework Decision is intended to ascertain approximate criminal laws of European Union (EU) Member States through a provision requiring member states to provide for criminal penalties, in order to fight the intent or extreme negligence of ship-source pollution. The court's judgment regarding the "Ship-Source Pollution" case follows a similar ruling in 2005 legal case "Environmental Crimes."

Analyzes the case R versus Lavender regarding the involuntary manslaughter by criminal negligence in New South Wales. Facts of the case; Arguments raised by the defendant; Decision of the Court of Criminal Appeal.

The article examines the issue of human rights under the European Convention on Human Rights, based on the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights in the case Osman v. the United Kingdom, delivered at Strasbourg, France on September 23, 1998. The applicant claimed that the State had failed to take adequate and appropriate steps to protect the lives of the second applicant, Ahmet Osman and his father, Ali Osman, from danger. The Court concluded that the applicant failed to show that there was criminal negligence on the part of the police that led to the manslaughter of Ali Osman.

Focuses on the scope of duty in negligence cases, looking specifically at the court case Eimann verses Soldier of Fortune Magazine. Debate on how the scope of duty should be determined; Proposal of a multi-factor policy to determine the scope of duty; Facts of the Eimann verses Soldier of Fortune Magazine case, which was filed by Marjorie Eimann; Methods of resolving the scope of duty question.

Any doctor can make a mistake: the important thing is to be honest with yourself and your patient, to take responsibility for the error, and to learn from it. Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Complaints to the General Medical Council (GMC) and litigation against doctors are currently rising at an alarming rate, with an increase of 23 per cent from 7153 in 2010 to 8781 in 2011.1 This equates to a 1:64 chance of the GMC investigating any individual doctor. Of all the causes of dissatisfaction among patients, one of the most common is the feeling that they 'were not told' that a particular outcome might result from a given treatment. Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses a court case wherein the parents of a 21-year-old young man with Down syndrome filed a lawsuit against the Southwest Denver Recreational Center (SWDRC) for negligence and breach of care duty in Denver, Colorado. It was found that an undisclosed young man accidentally died when he lost grip of the barbell and it landed on his neck. His parents sued SWDRC alleging that it was negligent in hiring, training and managing their employees.

The article discusses several court cases are presented. It includes the case of a 66-year-old patient which was infected of Clostridium difficile that leads to total colectomy due to physician's negligence in handoff care coordination which cost the physician of 2.75 million dollars. The case of a patient which died in lost of blood and cardiac arrest due to negligence in coordinating care towards potentially unstable patient, it costs 1.75 million dollars lost of the physician.

The article discusses a court case on a claim from the delay in diagnosing bilateral dislocation of both hips. The claim was settled in and approved on a lump sum basis. The Court of Protection and Professional Deputy agree that the claimant would always be a protected party as a result of her learning difficulties and vulnerability.

The article discusses a court case on a claim of the mother of the deceased arising out of an alleged delay in diagnosing thymic carcinoma. The defendant conceded that there had been errors in their management of the deceased, but vigorously denied that with additive, there often being a degree of overlap of pain, suffering and loss of amenity. The claim settled after the claimant accepted the defender's offer following exchange of witness and expert evidence.

The article discusses a court case in which a claimant files a claim for damages due to the negligent treatment provided to the death of a 54-year old pilot by the defendant Salford Royal NHS Foundation Trust in Great Britain. Proceedings commenced on April 11, 2006, and a defence was filed denying liability in January 2007. The defendant made an offer to settle the claimant's claim relative to her husband's death together with the reasonable costs which was later accepted by her.

The article discusses a court case wherein a general practitioner (GP) failed to consider the seriousness of the clinical situation involving an infant born at 29 weeks gestation in London, England in 1997. In Sumbulu v. Sarker, the GP failed to apply the low threshold test for hospital admission of high-risk infants. One of the issues seen in midwifery clinical negligence actions were communication problems which resulted to poor medical care.

Focuses on the case of doctors John Butchart and George Papworth in Great Britain. Establishment of a prima facie case of criminal negligence; Requirements giving evidence to criminal negligence; Significance of the nature of the inquisitorial system at the inquest.

The article reports on progress in the case of six male cancer patients in Great Britain who had their semen frozen and stored at Southmead Hospital in Bristol and found later that the semen had been accidentally thawed in June of 2003. The semen thawed when the amount of liquid nitrogen in the semen storage tanks fell below the required level. After deliberation Great Britain's Court of Appeal ruled in 2009 that the men could sue the trust which manages the hospital for negligence.

Reports on the possibility that British gynecologist Richard Neale will be extradited to Canada to stand trial on criminal negligence charges. Details of complaints lodged against Neale in Ontario, as well as similar charges filed in London, England; Outlook for the case's resolution in both countries.