Professional Practice

Download .pdf, .docx, .epub, .txt
Did you like this example?

Professional Practice Case Law Report Table of Contents Case description 3

  • Images related to the case

Material facts of the case 4 Explanation of the legal areas outlined in the judgment 5

Don’t waste time! Our writers will create an original "Professional Practice" essay for you whith a 15% discount.

Create order

  • Tort Law Overview
  • Negligence
  • Nuisance (Private and Public)
  • Duty of Care

Analysis of the decision 7

  • In the case of Negligence
  • In the case of Duty of Care
  • In the case of Nuisance

Reflective learning 8 Bibliography 9 Case Description THE HIGH COURT ON CIRCUIT Record Number: 998/03 SOUTH EASTERN CIRCUIT COUNTY OF WATERFORD

  • Plaintiffs : Oliver Dempsey and Elizabeth Dempsey
  • Defendant : Waterford Corporation
  • Judgement Title : Dempsey & Anor –v- Waterford Corporation
  • Neutral Citation : [2008] IEHC 55
  • High Court Record Number: Circuit Court 998/03
  • Judgment by: Peart J.
  • Composition of Court: Peart J.

Images related to the case ( ( Grattan Quay street view Dyehouse lane street view ( ( Grattan Quay OSI map Dyehouse lane OSI map Material Facts of the Case In the case of Dempsey & Anor- v- Waterford Corporation [2008] IEHC 55 (29 February 2008) the first material fact presented is that the plaintiffs purchased the house in 1984which they then restored and renovated. On the 3rd of March 2000, the plaintiffs discovered that the floor which was laid in the plaintiffs’ living room had buckled without any warning and noxious smell had developed in the room. Following this discovery by the plaintiffs a dye test inspection was carried out by Mr Chris O Sullivan which involved running a dye through the pipes in the street to see if any dye entered the living room of the plaintiff. Thereafter the plaintiffs ‘excavated their floor which revealed old 17th century drains. After further investigation it was revealed that the pipes went out of the house and also that the pipe was badly blocked A fact of central importance was noted that the defendant carried out major sewer renewal works on the main sewer and branch pipes on Grattan Quay. One of these branch pipes was located on Dyehouse Street and this pipe was previously inspected using the dye test as mentioned earlier. Mr O Sullivan stated that the defendant was unaware of these drains as they did not appear on maps or records leading to the defendant denying any negligence or fault in his case. Furthermore the defendant claims that the plaintiff should have complied with building regulations and should have applied vertical damp proof course which would have joined the vertical damp proof course thus preventing any moisture or dampness.

Do you want to see the Full Version?

View full version

Having doubts about how to write your paper correctly?

Our editors will help you fix any mistakes and get an A+!

Get started
Leave your email and we will send a sample to you.
Thank you!

We will send an essay sample to you in 2 Hours. If you need help faster you can always use our custom writing service.

Get help with my paper
Sorry, but copying text is forbidden on this website. You can leave an email and we will send it to you.