A driver runs a red light and causes an accident. This is an example of ...

The question asks what legal concept applies when a driver runs a red light and causes an accident. Here's a breakdown of the options: * Intentional tort: This refers to a situation where someone deliberately causes harm. Running a red light is usually not intentional. * Negligence: This is when someone fails to exercise reasonable care, resulting in harm to another person. Running a red light is a clear example of negligence. * Strict liability: This applies to certain activities that are so dangerous that the person engaging in them is held liable for any harm caused, regardless of fault. Driving is not generally considered a strict liability activity. * Vicarious liability: This is when one person is held liable for the actions of another person. This doesn't apply in this scenario. Therefore, the most appropriate answer is Negligence. Explanation for a student: Imagine you're playing soccer and accidentally kick the ball into a window, breaking it. That's usually an accident, meaning you didn't *intend* to break the window, but you might still be responsible because you weren't careful enough where you were kicking the ball. Running a red light is like that. A driver might not *want* to cause an accident, but they are responsible for being careful and following the rules of the road. When they don't, and someone gets hurt, that's called negligence.