Contractual negligence: Difference between revisions

Maybe. But negligence is the standard of behavior expected in [[tort]], where, by definition, ''there is no contract between the parties'' to which one can look for guidance on how they were meant to behave.  

Now negligence is all good fun - reasonable men (and women), Clapham omnibuses, snails, ginger-beer, escaping domestic animals - but it evolved ''ad hoc'' to address a particular human dilemma - the plight of an unseen neighbour - that simply ''doesn't exist'' where you have a contract. Here you know damn well who your neighbour is, having spent six months hammering out a legal agreement with the blighter. So it seems all rather forlorn that one should fall back, weakly, on a standard devised by imaginative judges to look after the interests of contractless folk who found themselves struck by a punt being carelessly navigated the wrong way up a flooded avenue.