留学生赔偿法案相关论文写作参考 [2]
论文作者:英语论文论文属性:作业 Assignment登出时间:2014-10-23编辑:zcm84984点击率:10418
论文字数:3454论文编号:org201409161246086954语种:英语 English地区:马来西亚价格:免费论文
关键词:赔偿法案Law EssayCompensation Act侵权法
摘要:本文是一篇留学生赔偿法案相关的论文,主要是关于补偿文化,补偿文化的定义是指一个人因为他们受到了与这个伤害有关,或应该为其负责的人的损害、损失或伤害,他应该得到补偿,这种认知是一个社会完全认可的。
ight—(a)prevent a desirable activity from being undertaken at all, to a particular extent or in a particular way,” This part of the act shows that it has taken steps to try stop claims to be brought into the courts and instead be settled outside the courts as ADR alternative-dispute-resolution where the procedure is much quicker and cheaper than court litigation. This furthermore prevents the claims which go through court and are taken care in decisions made by court judges where case law stops and prevents further action being taken. This part of the act specifies the approach the judges take to make case law concerning compensation as the end result can have a crucial impact within the compensation culture.
The second part of the Compensation Act 2006 s.2 [6] An apology, an offer of treatment or other redress, shall not of itself amount to an admission of negligence or breach of statutory duty. This part of the act clearly identifies that if the responsible individual offered an apology, solution or personal-injury to the other person involved consequently the person liable can’t get sued regarding negligence or breach of statutory duty. By not accepting apologies amount to negligence the claims have been limited to some degree therefore reducing the compensating culture. The procedure deals with the problem individuals claiming compensation on any insignificant matter which may occur therefore preventing compensation culture the other issue regarding this is that it may not be adequate for a vast majority of cases and could be criticized to not having a strong affect on major cases but only to the affects of small situations. The third part of the Compensation Act 2006 states s.3 [7] a person (“the responsible person”) has negligently or in breach of statutory duty caused or permitted another person (“the victim”) to be exposed to asbestos. This part of the act shows it has done only a proportional amount to address the concern of the increase of the compensational culture and this particular part of the act only looks at the issues regarding negligence brought upon victims who were exposed to asbestos therefore doesn’t go to the full extent to stop claims but limits them not to the full effect it possibly could.
It can be disputed that the section only affects a particular situation greatly however the act can be applied in other situations where the act can be very useful in the growing concern on the number of motor vehicle claims and claims for psychiatric harm where the act will valuable but as it is only limited in order to apply to cases the act in which it can be said that the Act has not done enough to reduce the concern about the compensation culture therefore the flood gates dispute is at affect and the Compensation Act 2006 can show to be ineffective due to the high number of compensation claims.
Part two of the Compensation Act which looks at claims management services is aimed at the claim management companies to put rules and regulations in place for the entire purpose of decreasing the idea of the compensation culture. Claim management companies [8] are under scrutiny as majority of the organisations have been proven that for their high-pressure sales tactics who visit accident victims in hospital to encourage them to make a claim they have also been banned for displaying advertisements in hospitals which shows and promotes to the injury victims to claim compensation. This
本论文由英语论文网提供整理,提供论文代写,英语论文代写,代写论文,代写英语论文,代写留学生论文,代写英文论文,留学生论文代写相关核心关键词搜索。