This site uses cookies. By continuing, your consent is assumed. Learn more

143.8fm shares

Reasonable person standard for sexual harassment

opinion

In law, a reasonable personreasonable manor the man on the Clapham omnibus [1] is a hypothetical person of legal fiction crafted by the courts and communicated through case law and jury instructions. Strictly according to the fiction, it is misconceived for a party to seek evidence from Reasonable person standard for sexual harassment people in order to establish how the reasonable man would have acted or what he would have foreseen.

In some practices, for circumstances arising from an uncommon set of facts, [5] this person is seen to represent a composite of a relevant community's judgement as to how a typical member of said community should behave in situations that might pose a threat of harm through action or inaction to Reasonable person standard for sexual harassment public. McDonald's Restaurantscan be examples where a vetted jury's composite judgment were deemed outside that of the actual fictional reasonable person, and thus overruled.

The reasonable person belongs to a family of hypothetical figures in law including: While there is a loose consensus in black letter lawthere is no accepted technical definition. As with legal fiction in general, it is somewhat susceptible to ad hoc manipulation or transformation, and hence the "reasonable person" is an emergent concept of common law.

As a legal fiction[3] the "reasonable person" is not an average person or a typical person, leading to great difficulties in applying the concept in some criminal cases, especially in regards to the partial defence of provocation. The standard performs a crucial role in determining negligence in both criminal law —that is, criminal negligence —and tort law.

The reasonable person standard aims...

The standard is also used in contract law, [12] to determine contractual intent, or if a breach of the standard of care has occurred, provided a duty of care can be proven. The intent of a party can be determined by examining the understanding of a reasonable person, after consideration is given to all relevant circumstances of the case including the negotiations, any practices the parties have established between themselves, usages and any subsequent conduct of the parties.

The standard does not exist independently of other circumstances within a case that could affect an individual's judgment.

InAdolphe Quetelet detailed the characteristics of l'homme moyen French"average man". His work is translated into English several ways. As a result, some authors pick "average man", "common man", "reasonable man", or stick to the original " l'homme moyen ". Quetelet was a Belgian astronomermathematicianstatistician and sociologist.

He documented the physical characteristics of man on a statistical basis and discussed man's motivations when acting in society. Two years later, the "reasonable person" made his first appearance in the English case of Vaughan v.

News feed