Institutional Repository

The explicit and implicit influence of reasonableness on the elements of delictual liability

Show simple item record

dc.contributor.advisor Knobel, Johann Ahmed, Raheel 2018-07-11T09:34:37Z 2018-07-11T09:34:37Z 2018-01
dc.identifier.citation Ahmed, Raheel (2018) The explicit and implicit influence of reasonableness on the elements of delictual liability, University of South Africa, Pretoria, <>
dc.description.abstract Reasonableness as a concept used in determining delictual liability or liability in tort law, is either embraced or perceived by some as frustrating. It is a normative concept which is inextricably linked with the concepts of fairness, justice, equity, public policy and the values of the community. These concepts assist in providing value judgements in determining liability. It is apparent from this study that the influence of reasonableness is predominantly implicit on the French law of delict, but more explicit on the South African law of delict and Anglo-American tort law. Its influence varies with respect to each element of tort or delictual liability. In order to hold a person liable for a delict or tort, it is only reasonable that all the elements of a delict or tort are present. Common to all the jurisdictions studied in this thesis is the idea of striking a balance between the defendant’s interests promoted, the plaintiff’s interests adversely affected and the interests of society. Where liability is based on fault, the reasonableness of conduct is called into question. In respect of causation whichever test or theory is used, what must ultimately be determined is whether according to the facts of the case, it is reasonable to impute liability on the defendant for the factually caused consequences. Whether loss or harm is required, assumed or not required, the question of the appropriate remedy or compensation which is reasonable under the circumstances is called into question. In South African and Anglo-American law, the multiple uses of the standards of the reasonable person, reasonable foreseeability of harm, reasonable preventability of harm, whether it is reasonable to impose an element of liability, or whether it is reasonable to impute liability, often cause confusion and uncertainty. At times, the role of these criteria with regard to a specific element may be valid and amplified while, at other times, their role is diminished and controversial. However, there is nothing wrong with the concept of reasonableness itself; indeed, it is a necessary and useful concept in law. Rather, it is the way that it is interpreted and applied in determining liability that is problematic. en
dc.format.extent 1 online resource (xxiii, 892, 6 leaves) en
dc.language.iso en en
dc.subject Implicit influence of reasonableness en
dc.subject Explicit influence of reasonableness en
dc.subject Fairness en
dc.subject Justice en
dc.subject Public policy en
dc.subject Equality en
dc.subject Values and views of the community en
dc.subject Reasonable person en
dc.subject Interests en
dc.subject Rights en
dc.subject Delictual liability en
dc.subject Liability in tort law en
dc.subject.ddc 346.32068
dc.subject.lcsh Negligence, Contributory -- South Africa en
dc.subject.lcsh Damages -- South Africa en
dc.subject.lcsh Torts -- South Africa en
dc.subject.lcsh Negligence -- South Africa en
dc.subject.lcsh Liability (Law) -- South Africa en
dc.subject.lcsh Civil rights -- South Africa en
dc.subject.lcsh Reasonable care (Law) -- South Africa en
dc.title The explicit and implicit influence of reasonableness on the elements of delictual liability en
dc.type Thesis en
dc.description.department Private Law en LL. D.

Files in this item

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

Search UnisaIR


My Account