20:49
THATS SO FUNNY
Warning
Info
Warning
Info
LSDefine
Simple English definitions for legal terms
foreseeability
Read a random definition: Bail Court
A quick definition of foreseeability:
Foreseeability: Foreseeability is a legal term that asks if someone could have known that their actions might cause harm. It is used in contract and tort law. Courts use the standard of "reasonability" to determine foreseeability. In contract law, it asks if the harm was a natural result of breaking the contract. In tort law, it asks if an ordinary person in the same situation would have acted the same way. To decide foreseeability, courts look at if the damages were a direct and obvious result of the breach or if the person should have known about the potential harm.
A more thorough explanation:
Foreseeability is a legal term that asks whether a person could have predicted the potential or actual results of their actions. This is an important question in contract and tort law.
In contract law, foreseeability is measured from the time a contract was made, not the time of the breach. The standard that courts use is that of "reasonability." This means that courts consider if damages were a direct and obvious result of the breach. For example, if a person agrees to deliver a package by a certain date and fails to do so, it is reasonable to foresee that the other party may suffer financial losses as a result.
In tort law, foreseeability asks whether a person could or should reasonably have foreseen the harms that resulted from their actions. For example, if a driver is texting while driving and causes an accident, it is reasonable to foresee that someone could be injured or killed as a result.
If resulting harms were not foreseeable, a defendant might successfully prove that they were not liable. However, even if a defendant could not have foreseen the scale of the resulting harm, they might still be found liable if a harm of that type was foreseeable.
Overall, foreseeability is an important concept in determining liability in legal cases. It asks whether a person could have reasonably predicted the consequences of their actions, and whether they should be held responsible for those consequences.