Research Paper on:
House of Lords and the Z v. UK Case X and Others (Minors) v Bedfordshire County Council; Was the House of Lords Correct?

Unformatted Sample Text from the Research Paper:
of law. Especially when looking at cases such as X and others (minors) v Bedfordshire County Council [1995] 3 All ER 353. To place this into context there are  many aspects to the law of tort, most of which can be seen as internationally uniform. Tort means a wrong, the term comes from tortum which means wrested, wrung or  crooked (Ivamy, 2001). The use of the word tort is usually used to signify as civil wrong that is not part of a contract or breach of contract (Ivamy,  2000). Actions use as libel, assault and trespass all come under the classification of Tort (Ivamy, 2000). Torts are also actionable, this means that they are grounds for a lawsuit,  such as harm resulting in a claim by the injured party. The remedy of which is generally in the form of monetary compensation for loss suffered (Anonymous, 2001). The main  aim of tort law is to provide a route to gain relief for damages received and costs incurred, at the same time as acting as a deterrent to others. However,  when we are considering the role of the statement we need to remember that there are both implied duties of care that need to be considered, and additionally there is  also the need to recognise the funds are coming form the public purse. This in itself does not mean there should be a different level of justice for those bringing  a tort against a council or public body, but it does increase the attention that is paid to such cases that result in a double violation of the public trust.  The case of Z v UK in the ECJ was the case that resulted from the case of X and others (minors) v Bedfordshire County Council. This can be