Do short brief (few notes) (15-20) (No need to read all the document, just the main information) comprising the most important takeaways of this text)Please. Thank you very much. I repeat, a genuinely partial reading is required, I really need your assistance. I reuploaded the missing text, please, just rely on few elements to make a small resume of it. Thank you

JOURNAL OF CIVIL LAW STUDIES [Vol. 8 immunized from time cases asjust it in order to ietims are usually protected by the law. This is illustrated by yees' liability exclusion for damage caused during mance of the specific task which their employers indemnification claims by their empires we ims under the respondear superior doctrine, How joyces did not profit from their wrongdoing and ar comically weakest parties and are immu notes economic efficiency. For instance, cour things to operate at a lower cost to ensure the nforeseeable liability, such as shown in frivol conduct affairs without risking unjustified ass sulting from their original negligence it doce not Infinitely liable for their conduct and dissuade all econon other Liat the Line between Fault-Based Tort Liability and First, the adoption of the relative liability rule could allow French law to better distinguish between fault-based tort liability 20151 SCOPE OF THE DUTY OF CARE and strict liability.!' As a general rule, according to the Latin on the specific law of strict liability falls within the framework of this regit excludes caved ropes scad It said that linbil other words, if pray Before her meet the requirements to hold the defendant, He is barred from recovery. Liability However, in practice, judges loosely follo established.171 The remedy for thesandwich liability neutralize the defendant's duty of care in civil respor fault (which therefore would no longer apply) when her they decide a case which falls with an she "seme. It would be impossible for them to resort to liability for Second. it could be argued that the defend easonably while performing a contract, As a result, his liability ould only be dealt with under warranty breach, so that he can be ble to provide for contractual liability limits." would make it closer to the Principles of European Tort Law w intend to harmonize the European Union countries' tort law. for VitY, ampra mote X, at 44-45. OURNAL OF CIVIL LAW STUDIES [Val. 8 . Harmonization with the Principles of European Tort Law imitations on the scope of defendants' duty within the framewo f its single liability clause would line French law up with the Principles of European Tort Law. Indeed, this European tort law guests propis the single liability clause providing for the civi ntentionally breaching the duty of care (called fault). " It also ca on the enforcement of public policy considerations. They ighter one. As a result. the Principles of Furman pad Chapter 3. section 2. article 3:201ability. It is set forth in Art 3:201. Scope of Liability Where an activity is a cause within the meaning of Section extent damage may be attributed to a person depends on the foreseenblity of the damage to a reasonable person at closeness in time and space between the damaging activity relation to the normal consequences of such an activity, 41. The Principles are an attempt to harmonize the Eur 142. EUROPEAN GROUP ON TORT LAW, mmpro sole 129, at art 4:101 isbility for others) constitutes an exception to the single liability close. See hold. 2015] SCOPE OF THE DUTY OF CARE 7 b. the nature and the value of the protected interests (article 2:1021 a the extend of polity farticle 1:101: the protective purpose of the rule that has been when house defendants' liability for fault to limit the scope of their responsibility, it does so based on the enforcement of the sam defendant's duty can be limited to the foreseeable risks in both reasonable care when they cause death or severe bodily inju Finally , the adoption of the limited liability rule in France say be highly advantageous to further integration with the other EU VI. CONCLUSION The general principle of liability for fault as applied by france misconduct and allocate the loss caused by each other. Moder societies have to carry in the file of relative responsibility an situations. This leads to more efficient apportionment of ham between the different actors. Depending on public policies, Fra by diverting the elements of one's liability for fault. The emonstrates that French law should go further in this direction, a duties of care under the single clause governing fault-based JOURNAL OF CIVIL LAW STUDIES [Vol. 8 off liability in order to be harmonized with its European neighbors' tort law