Australian law Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 words

Australian law - Essay ExampleIf a master key adviser is nominate to knowingly having provided or failed to provide information that exposes the advisee to incur any losses or damages on their part, this considered to be a breach of duty. All professionals argon generally held to an established and reasonable standard of basic care and professionalism. Professionals are generally required to have the necessary learning and skill that is seen to be commonly processed by members who happen to be held in good standing within their basic profession.2 However, any lack of the proper degree of training, failure by the professional to attempt to follow up on a clients progress, failure to remain appropriately conversant with any new emerge discoveries in the field, or failure to refer to a specialist in the event that it proves to be necessary can all be seen to constitute of negligence.3 As exemplified in the line of reasoning followed in the Hedley Byrne ruling, when an adviser commun icates information to an advisee in order that the information might be used for a generally exposit or particularly specified purpose, and the advisee acts on this advice to his detriment, the adviser is found to fundamentally be guilty of negligence.4 Effects of Donoghue V Stevenson (1932) A decision by the British house of commons in 1932 concerning the alleged presence of a snail inside a ginger beer bottle is commonly perceived to be the trump known judgment in the entire common law world. It is widely regarded as the primary foundation law of negligence throughout the entire British Commonwealth.5 Although the ruling of Donoghue V Stevenson (1932), was initially mostly applied to judgments pertaining to manufacturers and the duty of care that they happened to owe the various consumers of their products it was at last seen to have wider relevance beyond manufacturer liability. In the ruling, Atkins was seen to assert that a duty to exercise case was actually owed to all pers ons who might be directly affected by ones actions or omissions that happen to be called in question.6 This is seen to critically affect the liability of all professional advisers as in their event that they provide questionable information that eventually proves to be detrimental to the advisee, they are then effectively held viable for court action. The Effects of Hedley Byrne v. Heller (1963) The Hedley Byrne v. Heller (1963) greatly impacted the overall liability of professional advisers as it was the first decision to recognize the possibility of there being a liability for want can be perceived to be purely economic loss that is not dependent on there being a contractual relationship, for negligent statements. This was seen to affect advisers as any information that they may happen to give while not bound to any contractual agreement can also be seen to create duty of care as it might be relied upon by the advisee in determining whether to enter into a contract.7 Recent Deve lopments in Australian High Court There have been a number of recent developments in Australia pertaining to the case of professional negligence, in Astley v Austrust Ltd,