Breach Of Duty Flashcards
Reasonable man standard authority
Blyth v Birmingham Waterworks Co
No account is taken of D’s personality
Glasgow Corporation v Muir
D’s inexperience is irrelevant
Nettleship v Weston
D’s mental or physical impairments are not taken into account
Roberts v Ramsbottom
D is not liable when under the effects of disabling condition that he was not aware of
Mansfield v Weetabix Ltd
Responsibility is only removed if D is robbed of 100% if reasoning by mental illness
Dunnage v Randall Insurance UK Ltd
In the case of an emergency, D’s conduct should not be judged with hindsight
Parkinson v Liverpool Corporation
Reasonableness is judged as to what is foreseeable at the time of the negligence
Roe v Ministry of Health
Not all foreseeable risks need to be taken into account
Bolton v Stone
Must take into account magnitude of the risk
Miller v Jackson
Must take into account the severity of possible damage
Paris v Stepney BC
Attempting to save a life may justify higher levels of risk
Watt v Hertfordshire CC
Taking risks in the curse of recreational persists may be more difficult to justify
Barnes v Scout Association
Should weigh risk against difficulty in eliminating it
The Wagon Mound No2
Following accepted practice is usually good evidence to prove reasonable care
Morris v West Hartlepool Steam Navigation Co Ltd
Accepted practice can be found to be negligent in itself
Cavanagh v Ulster Weaving Co Ltd
Bolam test authority
Bolam v Friern Hospital Management Committee
2 parts of Bolam Test
Does he exercise the skill of an ordinary competent man exercising that particular art
Has he acted in accordance with practice accepted by reasonable body medical opinion
Bolam applies to parts of doctors work that are not medical
Sidaway v Bethlem Royal Hospital Governors
Inexperienced professional held to the same standards
FB v Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust
Bolam applies to other specialists
Maynard v West Midlands Regional Health Authority
