Mitchell v Glasgow City Council Case Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 words - 24

Mitchell v Glasgow metropolis Council Case - Essay ExampleUnfortunate facts are common with most of the leading models, especially establish on the delict law. This is particularly true as seen in Mitchell v Glasgow City Council case. James Mitchell is a renter under the housing local authority has a neighbor by the name Drummond James. Drummond becomes an antisocial neighbor, who ends up a total threat to Mr. Mitchell James. In December 1994, a conflict arose between Mitchell and Drummond due to issues of noise. At this point, Drummond went ahead to bang Mr., Mitchells door using an iron bar and also had the windows of the house smashed. This was the beginning of Mitchells horror with Drummond, who openly insulted him and at the same time issued threats to have him dead.James Mitchell suffered an attack from James Drummond. Mitchell suffered injuries that were complete(a) enough to cause his death. The verbal abuses went on for a period of 6 years. (ROBERT, 2009). He later killed him in 2001. It is at this point that the council of Glasgow took an initiative to have eviction proceeds against Drummond. Just before, the assault, Drummond got a summon from the council. It was therefore that he went back and committed the crime which took away Mitchells life. Mitchells daughter together with her mum, Mitchells wife filed a case against the Glasgow council for negligence that resulted in the loss of Mr. Mitchell.The law does not impose a trading that is positive to have someone protect other people and duty to have a soulfulness prevented from any form of impose on _or_ oppress emanating from any form of criminality on the basis of foreseeing its possibility. On the contrary, the harm that is foreseen is in it is not weighty enough to have the duty of care imposition. Therefore, this acted in the disfavor of Mitchells family.Ratio refers to reasons given to arrive at a certain decision. They offer a binding origin that is to say that the courts under in te rms of the hierarchy structure, have to follow the same in case a similar case arises and the same presented to them.