Georger Washington Essay -- Presidents England Farms Papers

George Washington The king of England, George III, was fond of farming. His favorite diversion was to ride about his lands, chatting with the tenants about the crops. "Farmer George," he called himself. His arch-opponent, George Washington, had the same fondness for farming. He too enjoyed riding about his lands and talking about the crops. Indeed there was nothing else he enjoyed quite so much. But there the likeness ceased. And among the many other matters that differentiated George Washington from George III, none was more striking than his greater dignity and reserve. George Washington would never have taken the liberty of calling himself "farmer George," nor would he have allowed anyone else to do so. Even his close friends took care to keep their distance, and those who forgot to were apt to be brought up sharp. A familiar anecdote, through perhaps apocryphal, well illustrates Washington's customary posture toward himself and toward others. During the meeting of the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia a group of Washington's friends were remarking on his extraordinarily reserved and remote manner, even among his most intimate acquaintances. Gouverneur Morris, who was always full of boldness and wit, had the nerve to disagree. He could be as familiar with Washington, he said, as with any of his other friends. Alexander Hamilton called his bluff by offering to provide a supper and wine for a dozen of them if Morris would, at the next reception Washington gave, simply walk up to him, gently slap him on the shoulder, and say, "My dear General, how happy I am to see you look so well." On the appointed evening a substantial number were already present when Morris arrived, walked up to Washington, bowed, shook hands, an... ...im in the election that elevated Jefferson to the presidency. But he need not have feared. The republic did survive and long preserved the aloofness from foreign quarrels that he had prescribed for it. His honor survived with it, and posterity has preserved his image in all the aloofness that he prescribed for himself. Although the mass of citizens have learned to look upon most of their other historical heroes with an affectionate familiarity, they have not presumed to do so with Washington. The good judgment that he was sure they possessed has prevented a posthumous repetition of the folly perpetrated by Gouverneur Morris. Americans honor the father of their country from a respectful distance. And that is surely the way Washington would have wanted it. --from Edmund S. Morgan, The Meaning of Independence (Charlottesville: University Press of Virginia, 1976) Georger Washington Essay -- Presidents England Farms Papers George Washington The king of England, George III, was fond of farming. His favorite diversion was to ride about his lands, chatting with the tenants about the crops. "Farmer George," he called himself. His arch-opponent, George Washington, had the same fondness for farming. He too enjoyed riding about his lands and talking about the crops. Indeed there was nothing else he enjoyed quite so much. But there the likeness ceased. And among the many other matters that differentiated George Washington from George III, none was more striking than his greater dignity and reserve. George Washington would never have taken the liberty of calling himself "farmer George," nor would he have allowed anyone else to do so. Even his close friends took care to keep their distance, and those who forgot to were apt to be brought up sharp. A familiar anecdote, through perhaps apocryphal, well illustrates Washington's customary posture toward himself and toward others. During the meeting of the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia a group of Washington's friends were remarking on his extraordinarily reserved and remote manner, even among his most intimate acquaintances. Gouverneur Morris, who was always full of boldness and wit, had the nerve to disagree. He could be as familiar with Washington, he said, as with any of his other friends. Alexander Hamilton called his bluff by offering to provide a supper and wine for a dozen of them if Morris would, at the next reception Washington gave, simply walk up to him, gently slap him on the shoulder, and say, "My dear General, how happy I am to see you look so well." On the appointed evening a substantial number were already present when Morris arrived, walked up to Washington, bowed, shook hands, an... ...im in the election that elevated Jefferson to the presidency. But he need not have feared. The republic did survive and long preserved the aloofness from foreign quarrels that he had prescribed for it. His honor survived with it, and posterity has preserved his image in all the aloofness that he prescribed for himself. Although the mass of citizens have learned to look upon most of their other historical heroes with an affectionate familiarity, they have not presumed to do so with Washington. The good judgment that he was sure they possessed has prevented a posthumous repetition of the folly perpetrated by Gouverneur Morris. Americans honor the father of their country from a respectful distance. And that is surely the way Washington would have wanted it. --from Edmund S. Morgan, The Meaning of Independence (Charlottesville: University Press of Virginia, 1976)

Dealing with Suffering and Loss

Suffering and loss is a regular situation in the human life cycle, it is vital to learn how to deal with it so that it doesn’t affect the rest of our lives negatively. In Scott Russell Sanders’s Ten Reasons Why We’ll Always Need a Good Story he explains that one of the reasons is to help us deal and become aware of suffering, loss, and death. During our youth we often don’t consider the end of the life cycle.However, in life we will always encounter grieving from a loved one’s death. The first time we experience some sort of grieving it may be very hard to handle and may cause depression. Stories help us prepare for moments of suffering, loss, and death with fictional experiences which show us how to deal with these unfortunate events. In the three short stories we read at least one character in each story is forced to deal with suffering, loss, or death.In the short story Bluffing by Gail Helgason, Liam has an unfortunate accident and experiences p hysical pain as well as the emotional pain of his deteriorating relationship with Gabriella. In Two Words by Isabel Allende, Belisa Crepusculario is devastated by the death of her entire family due to their impoverished lifestyle and the love between her and the Colonel causes them to miss each other. In The Indisputable Weight of the Ocean by Darryl Berger, Edmund deals with not being able to see his father and deals with the suffering of moving to a suburban area.First of all, breaking up with your partner can cause heavy depression to some people and it makes us feel like we’ve lost someone important in our lives, also enduring a large amount of physical pain causes us to more careful to avoid feeling anything like that again. In Bluffing we do not get to witness how Gabriella and Liam’s relationship continues, however, the author leaves us to infer that the relationship is coming to an end. We are also left to infer how they both feel after they breakup.Gabriella f eels that Liam is not committed to the relationship after he broke the news to her that he would be leaving to go on a hiking trip for three months. When Gabriella stormed off into the woods it becomes clear that she is ending the relationship, however, the accident that happened to Liam just after she stormed off made it hard for her to leave him because of his condition, it would make her seem superficial because Liam would think she is breaking up with him because he looks worse: â€Å"She knows in her bones that she can manage this way, for the rest of the rest of the afternoon, at least† (Helgason 7).Another example of suffering and loss in Bluffing is when Liam is unfortunately attacked by a grizzly and receives many injuries to his body and also to his face. Liam has to suffer with this immense amount of physical pain. Liam’s confidence may also be lower due to his â€Å"puffed up [skin], mottled, with ridges of shiny, rubbery scar tissue†(Helgason 7) whi ch may cause depression because he doesn’t want anyone to see him the way his is now, looking worse than before. We cannot allow breaking up with our partner or physical pain to affect us negatively for too long because these are both natural incidents of human life.Second of all, dealing with the death of a loved one is often the most amount of emotional pain someone can experience in a lifetime, also not knowing if you will ever see a loved one can also cause depression. In the short story Two Words Belisa Crepusculario lives an impoverished lifestyle where her â€Å"family is so poor they did not even have names to give their children†¦and [she] grew up in an inhospitable land† (Allende 1) making it hard for the Crepusculario family to survive.Tragically, Belisa had to bury four younger brothers and sisters. This is most likely the most horrifying incident Belisa will experience in her life time and what made it worse is that they were all very young. Surely, B elisa did a lot of grieving but she overcame her emotional pain and set out on a journey for a positive life. She became widely popular and respected across the country even catching the attention of the Colonel for her incredible skill with words. She enjoys her profession and the new life she has begun.This story of Belisa’s misfortune is a great lesson of human life because we cannot allow the grieving of a loved one’s death to control the rest of our lives, the same way Belisa beats the odds and begins a positive life: â€Å"There were few occupations she was qualified for. It seemed that selling words would be an honourable alternative† (Allende 3). The next example of suffering and loss in Two Words is when Belisa tells the colonel the secret words and they control his mind at an important point in his career: â€Å"Those two words that were buried like two daggers in his gut† (Allende 7).This shows loss because the Colonel is unable to think straig ht because of his love for Belisa after she tells him the two words. He doesn’t know if he will ever see her again and he is constantly worried about that. This shows us how not being able to see someone you love can affect you negatively. In two words Belisa’s grieving of her siblings and the love between Belisa and the Colonel are two examples that show us how to deal with suffering and loss.Not being able to see a family member or friend is similar to losing someone, however, we still have hope that we will one day meet them again, and being forced to change your lifestyle can cause suffering. In The Indisputable Weight of the Ocean a â€Å"little gentleman† by the name of Edmund Kelley has a father who is a mystery to him. The author explains, â€Å"For as long as he could remember, it had just been the two of them† (Berger 1). Since Edmund is an incredibly intelligent ten year old he has surely wondered if his father is actually just away for work fo r so many years.His father being away for so long makes Edmund feel as though he has lost him, however, he still has hope that one day his father will return, therefore he does not grieve like he would if he found out that his father is dead. The next example of suffering in the short story is not between two or more humans, it is between Edmund and his changing life. To Edmunds disappointment he and his mom have to leave their isolated lives on the acreage and move to a more populated suburban area.Since Edmund is anti-social towards children his own age it is hard for him to be around them all the time: â€Å"Edmund did not have much use for other children. The only time he saw any was when they went into town for groceries, and what he saw he did not like† (Berger 1). Edmund notices that his mother is only searching for a better life for the both of them: â€Å"Edmund was not without consideration for his mom. And because he did not want to be an extra burden on her, he t ried to cope with his new situation† (Berger 2). He tried his hardest to never complain about the suffering he is going through.In these two examples from this short story we learn how to deal with not being able to see a loved one and not knowing when or if you will see them again, and we learn how to cope with new situations that often occur in one’s life. Overall, some of the characters in the three short stories all have to face suffering and/or loss in a variety of ways. All the different situations teach us how to deal with these real life experiences so that suffering and loss doesn’t affect the rest of our lives negatively. We learn how to deal with a deteriorating relationship and physical pain from accidents.We also learn how to deal with the emotional pain of a deceased loved one and not knowing if you will ever see someone you fell in love with. The last two situations we learn how to deal with are, not being able to see a family member for a long tim e and the suffering of changing your lifestyle or where you live. Instead of learning from our own mistakes like we are always told to do when we’re growing up, stories allow us to never make those mistakes ourselves, but learn from the mistakes that the characters have made.

Introduction to Negligence - Free Essay Example

Sample details Pages: 10 Words: 2925 Downloads: 1 Date added: 2017/06/26 Category Law Essay Type Research paper Level High school Tags: Tort Essay Did you like this example? Discuss what is meant by a à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‹Å"duty of careà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢ in the tort of negligence. Explain the test which is applied in the tort of negligence to determine whether the defendant breached the legal duty of care owed to the claimant. What factors would a court take into account when determining how a reasonable person would act? Duty of care Test applied for determining Factors court would take into account to determine how a reasonable person would act Tort law Tort in general are a set of rights, obligation that are provided to the citizen by a civil court in order to maintain safety of people and provide remedies for persons who have been inflicted suffering/losses by the wrongdoings of other citizens. (https://legaldictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Tort+Law) A tort is a wrongdoing by a citizen towards another for which he/she is tried in the court of law. The plaintiff is the person against whom the wrong has been committed and who has suffered losses. Don’t waste time! Our writers will create an original "Introduction to Negligence" essay for you Create order Whereas, the person because of whom the damages/losses have occurred to the plaintiff is known as the defendant. The law of tort is obtained from common law principles that have come from case laws and legislative enactment. Torts are not dependent on any sort of agreement between the two parties involved and this is how tort law is distinguishable from breach of contract or any other type of law. Moreover, it is the citizen who brings the tort case even though criminal prosecutions are applied by the state. Defendants, in case of tort law, do not receive fines and neither do civil courts incarcerate them. (https://www.findlaw.co.uk/law/government/constitutional_law/500400.html) The word tort is derived from a latin word à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‹Å"torquereà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢, meaning incorrect or twisted. There was no separate legal action under the English common law. In place of tort the English law system provided plaintiffs with two options of reparation: trespass for direct injuries an d for indirect injury, action on the case. In time, other civil wrongdoings were also recognized by the English common law, for ex Defamation, libel, slander. English common law became popular in America and they started adopting it. The first U.S. treatises that were published had a portion of common law which was created under the tort law. Every tort action requires some criteria to be fulfilled. First, the plaintiff must prove that the defendant had a legal obligation to act in a particular manner. Second, the plaintiff must prove that the defendant breached this duty by acting in a wrong way. Third, the plaintiff must be able to prove that he suffered losses, damage and injury because of the defendant not being able to follow his legal duty. (https://legaldictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Tort+Law) The law of tort aims to serve the following objectives. First, tort law aims at providing compensation to the plaintiff for injury/losses suffered due to the misdoings of the de fendant. Second, it tries to punish the defendant by making them pay for the cost of such losses/injury. Third, it seeks to make sure that such an irresponsible, careless behavior is discouraged in the future. Lastly, tort law seeks to claim the legal rights that are compromised or diminished. The above mentioned objectives me into play when the tort liability is imposed on defendants for negligence, intentional misdoings. Types of tort Intentional Torts Intentional tort is when a citizen or a group of people purposely indulge in an activity that harms or causes damage to another. For example, one person attacking another in a fight will be considered as an intentional act that would come under this tort. Seeing the above example it may look like an intentional tort may be categorized as a criminal case, but there are some differences between them. A crime can be thought of as when an individualà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢s actions damages or injures the interest of the society. W hereas, an intentional tort is when the actions of an individual affects/injures the property/well-being of one individual. While in a criminal case the charges are brought on by the government and can lead to jail sentence, in a tort the victim presses the charges against the defendant and is usually seeking for monetary compensation for the injury/damages caused by the defendant. Negligence Every individual/citizen is anticipated to behave in a particular manner and conduct themselves responsibly. This is also considered as a legal duty of the citizens as this would reduce the risk of damage/injury/harm to the others. If a citizen fails to abide by these requirements he/she is said to be negligent and the act comes under negligence. Tort of negligence has been the most prevalent tort. A lot different than the tort of intention, negligence tort doesnà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢t consider intentional actions by a person, whereas it takes into account the cases where an individual acts carelessly and fails to obey the above mentioned legal duties towards fellow citizen causing them harm/injury/damage. The most common case is of slip and fall wherein a property owner fails to behave as a rational person would, hence causing harm to the visitor. Strict Liability This type of tort (strict/absolute) involves imposing responsibility, for a damage/injury/harm, on the person who has done wrong without the requirement of proof of negligence or intention. What only count is that an action transpired which eventually led to injury/damage/harm of another person. The most major example is of defective products, where the liability is imposed irrespective of intent. In such cases the only requirement the injured person has to fulfill is to prove that the injury was directly caused by the malfunction of the product in order to have the law on their side. The companyà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢s intention is this case is not taken into consideration. Business tort (https://www .inc.com/articles/1999/11/15387.html) In business tort the damage is not done to an individual but to imperceptible assets such as economic interest or business relations or contracts. Fraudulent Misrepresentation Fraudulent misrepresentation aims at protecting an individualà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢s economic interests and also their right to reasonable and true treatment. If a plaintiff wishes to file a fraud claim he/she must prove that the defendant purposely misrepresented a fact which the plaintiff relied on and was eventually harmed/suffered losses due to the misrepresentation. For example, if a company presents factually wrong/misleading financial statements to a bank in order to procure a loan and the bank relying on those statements provides the loan then the bank is eligible to file a case for fraud against the company if they arenà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢t able to pay the loan back. Fraud claim can be filed if the defendant had the duty to disclose a fact but he/she failed to do so. Like for instance a financial advisor on behalf of both buyer and seller may be held for fraud if he has knowledge about the toxic content of the property and fails to tell this to the buyer. TORT OF NEGLIGENCE The most common kind of tort that one comes across is the tort of negligence and is generally used to represent behavior that causes the unreasonable risk of harm to other individuals. There are a few elements that are required to be established for the negligence tort. They are as follows: A duty of care should exist between the plaintiff and the defendant. The defendant breaching that duty of care. Defendants breach causes direct harm/ injury/damage to the plaintiff. DUTY OF CARE A duty of care is when a person is required to behave carefully, with responsibility and attention towards other individuals in a way a reasonable person would. If the individual fails to meet the expected standard of care then they behavior is considered negligent and any damage/harm resulting from it may be filed for negligence it the court of law. (https://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/duty+of+care) Judges making decisions in various cases involving tort of negligence has led to the gradual development of duty of care. This first came to light in a case of negligence of donoghuev v Stevenson (1932) in which the plaintiff (mrs. Donoghuev) went to a cafÃÆ' © with a friend of hers. Her friend brought her a drink of ginger beer and ice cream. The contents of the beer couldnà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢t be seen as it was in a dark bottle. Mrs. Donoghuev drank some of the beer and then poured the rest out and to her shock saw a dead, decomposing snail in the drink . This horrified mrs. Donoghuev and led to her becoming ill. The main reason of her falling ill was the sight and the ginger beer she had already drunk. In spite of clear negligence on the part of the manufacturer mrs. Donoghuev couldnà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢t claim against the manufacturer or the shopkeeper based on contract since she wasnà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢t the one who bought the drink. Mrs. Donoghuevà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢s friend bought the drink hence she could claim against the cafÃÆ' © based on contract, but again since her friend didnà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢t suffer any kind of illness/losses apart from the fact that she had bought the defective good. In this case the only remedy that could be provided was money back to the friend and no remedy for mrs. Donoghuevà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢s health. Hence, mrs. Donoghuev decided to file a claim against the drinkà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢s manufacturer (Stevenson). Her claims were based on the stomach illness and resulting shock from the consumption of t he beer and the sight respectively. Whether her claim against the drinkà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢s manufacturer would succeed or no was now dependent on the courtà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢s decision. This situation led to lord Atkinà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢s famous statement. à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã…“The rule that you are to love your neighbour becomes in law, you must not injure your neighbour; and the lawyerà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢s question, à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‹Å"Who is my neighbour?à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢ receives a restricted reply.You must take reasonable care to avoid acts or omissions which you can reasonably foresee would be likely to injure your neighbour.Who, then, in law is my neighbour? The answer seems to be: persons who are so closely and directly affected by my act that I ought reasonably to have them in contemplation as being so affected when I am directing my mind to the acts or omissions which are called in question.à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚  Donoghuev v stevenson (1932) was the first attempt that succeeded to set out a general principle with respect to the concept of the duty of care. As the lawyers began to realize that the above mentioned principle could be changed to be used with various types of cases, the test was restructured to create the three part test in the case of caparo v dickman (1990) The general parameters set in the test for caparo v dickman were as follows It should be reasonably foreseeable that an individual in the plaintiffà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢s position was at risk of injury/harm/damage. There should be satisfactory proximity between the two parties. Proximity here means that two parties involved should be close enough such that it is à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‹Å"reasonably foreseeableà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢ that negligence by one party leads to damage/injury to the other party. It should be just, rational and realistic to enforce liability on the defendant. All the above mentioned parameters should be met if a duty of care is to be payable by the defendant to the plaintiff. Also there is a necessity for each part to be proved and explained separately and unambiguously. Caparo Test The First Part à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â‚¬Å" Foreseeablility This test is objective. Would it be foreseeable that someone in the claimants place might be injured by a reasonable individual? In Donoghue v Stevenson (1932) it can be seen that the consumerà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢s health will be affected if the snail gets into the bottle. This particular situation is of supplying consumable products with foreign bodies in it and a reasonable individual would be able to foresee that the consumer (plaintiff) may very likely be injured. In the case of Kent v Griffiths (2000) a patient was suffering from a serious asthma attack and therefore a doctor ordered an ambulance to take the patient to the hospital immediately. The ambulance control centre received the messaged and they acknowledged it. Without any acceptable reason the ambulance arrived very late, the result of which was that the patient suffered a heart attack. The heart attack could have been avoided if she had been attended to earlier. A reasonable individual would find it foreseeable that that the ambulanceà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢s failure to arrive in time would cause the patient to suffer from serious harm. There have also been various cases where the courts have decided that it isnà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢t reasonably foreseeable that the plaintiff would suffer harm. For instance, in Bournhill v Young (1943) a motorcyclist crashed into a car and was killed due to driving too fast. Mrs. Bournhill, who was very close to the scene, was eight months pregnant. Mrs. Bournhill only heard the incident but didnà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢t actually see it. As she witnessed the blood on the road and body it led to her experiencing a severe shock which further led to her baby being born still. She filed a case against the motorcyclist blaming him for her plight. But the court denied her claims as they decided that the motorcyclist couldnà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢t have reasonably foreseen that his accident would affect mrs. Bournhill, hence he didnà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢t owe any duty of care to her. The Second Part à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â‚¬Å" Proximity A duty of care exists only when the harm caused is reasonably foreseeable and also if the relation between the plaintiff and the defendant is sufficiently close. The same can also be seen in the case of Osman v Ferguson (1993) in which the police officers were aware of the risk the victim was at. The victim was hence murdered by the attacker. During the proceedings the courts established that the plaintiff and defendant had a sufficiently close relationship. However, the case failed because it was decided that it isnà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢t fair, just to impose a duty of care on the police. The Third Part à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â‚¬Å" Fair, just and reasonable Generally, courts refrain from imposing a duty of care on the public authorities. However, is few situations the police do somehow owe a duty of care. In the case of MPC v Reeves (2001) a man with suicidal tendencies was taken into custody by the police. He hanged himself to death in the cell while he was in custody. In this particular case the police did owe the victim a duty of care. Breach of Duty Once a claimant has proved the duty of care is owed he must then show that the defendant breached that duty. This is merely when the defendant falls below the standard of care appropriate to the duty. Breach of duty is measured objectively by the à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‹Å"reasonable man testà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢. The reasonable man is the ordinary person performing the particular task: he is expected to perform it reasonably competently. Thus, when I am riding my bicycle, I am expected to be a reasonably competent cyclist who can ride a bicycle. Therefore, a number of factors that can be considered to raise or lower the standard. This is logical because a reasonable person will rightly take greater risks in an emergency, and take more care when the risk of harm is greater. For a breach of duty to occur, the court will take four factors into account: Now that the plaintiff has proved that duty of care exists the next step is to show that the defendant has breached that duty. -Thedegree of r iskinvolved: the greater the risk, the more the defendant has to take care. (Bolton v Stone 1951). -Thecost of precautions: the courts will see how high the risk is involved, and then take into account the expense of taking precautions to prevent that risk (Bolton v Stone and Latimer v AEC). -Potential seriousness of injures: so if there is a very high risk of serious injury, the more the defendant needs to be very careful (Paris v Stepney B.C. 1951). -Theimportance of the activity: in an emergency, sometimes it is not possible to reflect, think of a possible risk (Marshall v Osmand 1982). Standard for expertsà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â‚¬Å" where the defendant has some expertise, for example, he is a doctor carrying out medical treatment, then the standard of care is that which would normally be expected from a doctor. InBolam v Friern Hospital Management (1957)the judge said: A man need not possess the highest expert skill; it is à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦ sufficient if he exercises the ord inary skill of an ordinary competent man exercising that particular art. In some situations, it is difficult to know exactly what happened, although it is found obvious that the defendant was negligent. In these situations a rule calledres ipsa loquitur, which means (things speak for themselves) was developed by judges. It has to be shown that:  ·The defendant was in control of the situation (causing injury).  ·The injury was more likely than not to be caused by negligence. If the claimant proves these two things then the defendant has to prove that he was not negligent. This rule was shown in the case ofScott v London and St. Katherine Docks (1865)where the claimant was hit by six bags of sugar which fell from the defendantà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢s warehouse. The claimant could not say why the bags had fallen but the court ruled that the facts spoke for themselves and it was up to the defendant to prove that he was not negligent.