JB/073/079/001: Difference between revisions

Transcribe Bentham: A Collaborative Initiative

From Transcribe Bentham: Transcription Desk

Find a new page on our Untranscribed Manuscripts list.

JB/073/079/001: Difference between revisions

TB Editor (talk | contribs)
No edit summary
BenthamBot (talk | contribs)
No edit summary
 
(3 intermediate revisions by one other user not shown)
Line 4: Line 4:
<head>C</head>
<head>C</head>
<head>Simple Personal Injuries</head>
<head>Simple Personal Injuries</head>
<p>If your intention was only to <del>make him</del> hurt<lb/> him <del>arm</del> in the <add>fore-</add>-arm or the leg without depriving<lb/> him of <del>the use of</del> either, the act was inadequately<lb/> intentional: if your intention was to <add>deprive</add> <del>halt</del><lb/> him, <add>of his thigh or of the whole of his arm</add> <del>your</del> the act was more than adequately<lb/> intentional.<lb/></p>
 
<p>Where an act that proves eventually <del>mis-</del><lb/> detrimental to a person was <del><add>altogether</add></del> unintentional with<lb/> respect to <del><gap/></del> <add>the eventual</add> damage, it may either have been<lb/> <hi rend='underline'>heedless</hi> <add>x</add> or not <hi rend='underline'>heedless</hi>. It is termed <hi rend='underline'>heedless</hi>, where<lb/> <add>it appears that</add> the agent ought to have <del>foreseen <gap/><gap/></del> <add>avoided producing</add><lb/> <del><gap/> of</del> the damage that eventually ensued,<lb/> inasmuch as a person of ordinary prudence <del>could</del> <add>might</add><lb/> with an ordinary share of caution have foreseen<lb/> <del>and avoided</del> the probability of its resulting<lb/> from the act.<lb/></p>
<p>If your intention was only to <del>make him</del> hurt
<p>Thus if it should appear for example <note>Example.</note><lb/> that you had no particular intention of striking<lb/> the man but <add>yet</add> that he was <del>however</del> close to you<lb/> inasmuch that if <del><gap/></del> you had but looked round<lb/> to <del><gap/></del> observe whether any person was in the way<lb/> you must have seen him, it will appear that<lb/> your striking him was an act of heedlessness. But<lb/> this will not appear to have been the case, if at<lb/> the time of your beginning to move your arm he<lb/> was out of <add>your</add> reach, and was brought within it unexpectedly<lb/> and by accident: for instance by a shove from <add>another</add><lb/></p>
<lb/>  
him <del>arm</del> in the <add>fore-</add>-arm or the leg without depriving
<lb/>  
him of <del>the use of</del> either, the act was inadequately
<lb/>  
intentional: if your intention was to <add>deprive</add> <del>halt</del>
<lb/>  
him, <add>of his thigh or of the whole of his arm</add> <del>your</del> the act was more than adequately
<lb/>  
intentional.</p>
 
<p><note>Heedlessness - <del>what</del> or Negligence, what</note> Where an act that proves eventually <del>mis-</del>  
<lb/>  
detrimental to a person was <del><add>altogether</add></del> unintentional with
<lb/>  
respect to <del><gap/></del> <add>the eventual</add> damage, it may either have been
<lb/>  
<hi rend='underline'>heedless</hi> <hi rend='superscript'>x</hi> or not <hi rend='underline'>heedless</hi>. It is termed <hi rend='underline'>heedless</hi>, where
<lb/>  
<add>it appears that</add> the agent ought to have <del>foreseen <gap/> the probability</del> <add>avoided producing</add>
<lb/>  
<del>of</del> the damage that eventually ensued,
<lb/>  
inasmuch as a person of ordinary prudence <del>could</del> <add>might</add>
<lb/>  
with an ordinary share of caution have foreseen
<lb/>  
<del>and avoided</del> the probability of its resulting
<lb/> from the act.</p>
 
<p><note>Example.</note> Thus if it should appear for example
<lb/>  
that you had no particular intention of striking
<lb/>  
the man but <add>yet</add> that he was <del>however</del> close to you
<lb/>  
inasmuch that if <del><gap/></del> you had but looked round
<lb/>  
to <del>see</del> observe whether any person was in the way
<lb/>  
you must have seen him, it will appear that
<lb/>  
your striking him was an act of heedlessness. But
<lb/>  
this will not appear to have been the case, if at
<lb/>  
the time of your beginning to move your arm he
<lb/>  
was out of <add>your</add> reach, and was brought within it unexpectedly
<lb/>  
and by accident: for instance by a shove from <add>another</add></p>


<!-- DO NOT EDIT BELOW THIS LINE -->
<!-- DO NOT EDIT BELOW THIS LINE -->
{{Metadata:{{PAGENAME}}}}
{{Metadata:{{PAGENAME}}}}{{Completed}}

Latest revision as of 10:07, 4 February 2020

Click Here To Edit

C Simple Personal Injuries

If your intention was only to make him hurt
him arm in the fore--arm or the leg without depriving
him of the use of either, the act was inadequately
intentional: if your intention was to deprive halt
him, of his thigh or of the whole of his arm your the act was more than adequately
intentional.

Heedlessness - what or Negligence, what Where an act that proves eventually mis-
detrimental to a person was altogether unintentional with
respect to the eventual damage, it may either have been
heedless x or not heedless. It is termed heedless, where
it appears that the agent ought to have foreseen the probability avoided producing
of the damage that eventually ensued,
inasmuch as a person of ordinary prudence could might
with an ordinary share of caution have foreseen
and avoided the probability of its resulting
from the act.

Example. Thus if it should appear for example
that you had no particular intention of striking
the man but yet that he was however close to you
inasmuch that if you had but looked round
to see observe whether any person was in the way
you must have seen him, it will appear that
your striking him was an act of heedlessness. But
this will not appear to have been the case, if at
the time of your beginning to move your arm he
was out of your reach, and was brought within it unexpectedly
and by accident: for instance by a shove from another



Identifier: | JB/073/079/001"JB/" can not be assigned to a declared number type with value 73.

Date_1

Marginal Summary Numbering

not numbered

Box

073

Main Headings

law in general

Folio number

079

Info in main headings field

simple personal injuries

Image

001

Titles

Category

text sheet

Number of Pages

4

Recto/Verso

recto

Page Numbering

f5 / / / f8

Penner

jeremy bentham

Watermarks

[[watermarks::gr [crown motif] [britannia with shield motif]]]

Marginals

jeremy bentham

Paper Producer

Corrections

Paper Produced in Year

Notes public

ID Number

23919

Box Contents

UCL Home » Transcribe Bentham » Transcription Desk
  • Create account
  • Log in