Breach Of Duty

Question 1

The definition of negligence by Baron Alderson?

Answer 1

Negligence is the omission to do something which a reasonable man, guided upon those considerations which ordinarily regulate the human affairs, would do, or doing something which a prudent and a reasonable man would not do.’

Question 2

What happened and was held in Glasgow Corp. v Muir (1943)?

Answer 2

Picknickers, the rain sheltered in the tearoom - tea fell and 6 children were scalded. It was held that that the accident although it was a foreseen as a possibility it was not a reasonable probability to the extent the mangeress should have expected to clear the hall of children in.

Question 3

What happened in Nettleship v Weston?

Answer 3

D a learner driver went out for her first lesson, supervised by a friend C. D crashed the car into a lamppost and C was injured.

Question 4

What was held in Nettleship v Weston?

Answer 4

The fact a particular driver is inexperienced does not excuse him falling short of this standard. It does not matter that they are doing a test. Even learner drivers are to be judged against the standards of the reasonable competent learner driver. D was liable

Question 5

What happens in Mullins v Richards?

Answer 5

D, a 15 year old schoolgirl had a “sword fight” with C with plastic rulers in their classroom. One of the rules snapped and piece entered Cs eye, causing permanent damage.

Question 6

What was held in Mullins v Richards?

Answer 6

Neither the teacher nor D had been negligent. There was insufficient evidence that the accident has been foreseeable in what had been no more than a childish game. A child will be judge according to the treasonable child.

Question 7

What happened in Boll v Frien v Barnett HMC?

Answer 7

D, a hospital gave electroconvulsive theorapy that broke Cs bones. Some doctors would give reluctant drugs others would not. It ended about causing a spassam and permanent damage.

Question 8

What happened in Paris v Stepney BC?

Answer 8

D employed C, a garage mechanic. C had lost the sight of one eye during the war. He struck metal with a hammer but a piece of metal flew off and struck him in his good eyes. He had no goggles on and became totally blind.

Question 9

What was held in Paris v Stepney BC?

Answer 9

The defendant knowing of his disability should have taken extra care to provide goggles for him. The more serious the possible damage, the greater the precautions that should’ve been taken. If the defendant knows that the Cali meant is more vulnerable because of special characteristics, then a higher standard of care is expected.

Question 10

What happened in Bolton v Stone?

Answer 10

D was a cricket club from where a cricket ball was struck over a 10 foot fence. It hit C, who was standing outsider her house. Such a thing happened only six times in 30 years.

Question 11

What was held in Bolton v Stone?

Answer 11

The reasonable man does not take care against minute risks but does against big ones. It was held the risk was so slight and the expense of reducing it was so great that a reasonable cricket club would have taken any further precautions.

Question 12

What happened in Latimer v AEC?

Answer 12

D was a factor owner. C was an employee that slipped on some oil and injured his ankle. Sawdust was put down to soak up liquid, it did not cover the entire floor. The oil was the result of expeptionally heavy stock.

Question 13

What was held in Latimer v AEC?

Answer 13

The defendant must have taken reasonable but not impractical precautions. D had done all that a reasonable person would do in the circumstance; they could not have eliminated the risk completely without closing the factory.

Question 14

What happened and was held in Roberts v Ramsbottom (1980)?

Answer 14

A 73 year old with symptoms indicating a stroke continued to drive and caused three accidents. It was held that the driver was negligent as he had some awareness of his umpires capacities.

Question 15

What happened and was held in Mansfield v Weetabix Ltd 1998?

Answer 15

The lorry drive did not know he was suffering from an illness in which led him slowly becoming unconscious. He crashed into the plaintiffs shops, it was held he had not been negligent.

Question 16

What was held in Roe v Ministry of Healthy 1954?

Answer 16

Where the state of scientific and technical knowledge may be involved, the defendant’ actions will be judged on the standard prevalent in the circumstances of the time. Lord Denning: we must not look at the 1947 accident with 1954 spectacles.

Question 17

What was held in Phillips v William Whiteley?

Answer 17

If a person wants to ensure that the operation of piercing her ears is going to be carried out with that proportion of skill… the fellow of the Royal College of Surgeons would use, she must go to a surgeon.

Question 18

What was held in Wilsher v Essex AHA (1987)?

Answer 18

The law requires the trainee or learner to be judged by the same standard as his more experienced colleagues. If it did not, inexperience would frequently be urged as a defence to an action for professional negligence - Glidewell L.J

Question 19

What happened in Watt v Hertfordshire?

Answer 19

A firefighter had to help someone underneath the truck, the fire services improvised in using different equipment and the claimant was injured.

Question 20

What was held Watt v Hertfordshire CC 1954?

Answer 20

It was held saving a life is a necessary response in this situation. Lord Denning said “The commercial end to make a profit is very different from the human end to save life or limb” so if the accident had happened in a commercial adventure the outcome would be different.

Question 21

Compensation Act 2006

Answer 21

The section was enacted to serve as reminder to judges not to set too high a standard of care, otherwise it may have an inhabiting consequence. It is necessary to bring down compensation culture.

Question 22

What does Res ipsa loquitur mean?

Answer 22

The literal translation means “the thing speaks for itself”. It has been developed to be used only to infer negligence but not actually prove.

Question 23

What was held in Scott v St Katherine’s Dock 1865?

Answer 23

It applauds treasonable evidence in the absence of explanation by the defendant that the accident arose from want of care” In other words it’s efficient in this maxim,!(94 the claimant to prove the defendant was in control of the situation which has caused injury to then and the accident wouldn’t have occurred without acts of careless.

Question 24

What happened in Bolam v Friern Hosp Managemebr Committe 1957?

Answer 24

In 1954, the claimant was suffering from a mental illness, he was advised to undergo electroconvulsive therapy. He was not warned of the risk of the procedure, the claimant sustained fractures.

Question 25

What was held in Bolam v Friern Hosp Management Committe (1956)?

Answer 25

According to McNair J - the test is the standard of an ordinary skilled man exercising and professing to have that special skill. Therefore a professional is held by the standards of a reasonable professional.

Question 26

What happened in Bolito v City and Hackney HA (1998)?

Answer 26

A two year old was under the of a Dr, due to negligence she suffered a total respiratory failur, resulting in brain damage and then his death.

Question 27

What was held in Bolitho v City and Hackney HA 1998?

Answer 27

The legal principle established was that the court must be satisfied that such opinion has logical basis. The test change from Bill to Bolitho to the extent that medical negligence is more likely to be found by the courts.