Every person is having different set of knowledge and skill with them which is different from other individual, this difference in skill and knowledge factor among various individual leave a margin for the standard error or difference of opinion. In case of Luxmoore-May v. Messenger May Baverstock, it was established that the valuer has done his job with perfect care and skill level but his opinion and skill level is different from other valuer hence he can’t be held liable for the error and difference in opinion among the various valuer. Hence this case established that every error done by the project manager can’t be termed as the negligence on part of the project manager but it can be termed as the difference in skill and knowledge level which would always be present in some quantity which would be acceptable generally.
In case of Singer vs Friedlabder pvt ltd, 1977 it was established that valuation process is subjected to the opinion of individual persons hence it can’t be precise and it can always be subjected to variation from one person to other as per the change in opinion. Since while doing the valuation of any property various assumptions are to be made from the valuer which differ from one valuer to other hence precise calucaltion of the valuation is not possible but only expectation from the valuer is that he will apply his skill and knowledge to calculate the value by best of his opinion. Hence some degree of error is always acceptable from the side of valuer. Hence two individual valuers can come to different valuation for the same property based on their logical assumptions made while making calculation for the property being valued by them. Hence based on their assumptions we can’t say that any of them is not having proper competence knowledge or skill to value the property.
In case of Hardy Vs Wamsley, 1967 while making the survey, surveyor failed to notice that there is a piece of skirting with waviness characteristics of dry rot. Though it was a professional negligence from the surveyor but since it was just a minor issue hence the same can’t be highlighted to such a high degree that surveyor can be held liable for such a mistake hence some degree of leeway is always given to the valuer for the mistake or negligence they make since it is always not possible to make precise calculations. In another case Lawrence Vs Hampton, 1964, surveyor made the negligence that there was a crack in the building, though jury will notice this argument that surveyor has done the professional negligence but there will not be any kind of liability which would be imposed on the surveyor for doing this since it can happen from any person.
This law assignment help sample is provided by our team of law experts who provide excellent law homework help to law students worldwide. Apart from law of negligence assignment help, our team also provides online law assignment help in other law subjects such as property law assignment help, business law assignment help etc. Send your assignment or contact us now.