Breach of Duty Flashcards
What is appealed to in torts for the objective standard? Which case illustrates this?
The Clapham omnibus (Healthcare at Home v Common Services Agency).
Which case illustrates the objective test applied for tort law cases? Hint: it involves an amateur driver. Give facts and verdict briefly.
An amateur driver crashes into claimant injuring him. Claimant sues for negligence. Held: His amateurism does not excuse him.
What are the exceptions to the general rule of objective v subjective liability in tort, and which case or statute demonstrates each?
1) Age (Mullin v Richards); 2) disability (Mansfield v Weetabix); 3) timing (Roe v Minister of Health); 4) the utility of the conduct (Compensation Act 2006 s1); 5) probability of harm (Bolton v Stone); 6) gravity of harm (Paris v Stepneg); 7) cost of precaution (Latimer); and 8) context (Woolridge v Summer).
For the objective standard of liability, how is age assessed? What is the test?
If person is under 18 then the test is ‘ what a reasonable x year old would act like’.
For the objective standard how is disability factored in? What are the requirements?
It is required that a person is unaware of his condition or that he couldn’t do anything about it.
This case involves a schizophrenic person lighting himself on fire. Give facts, ratio, and verdict.
(Dunnage v Randall). A schizophrenic man lights himself on fire injuring C, C sues in trespass. Held: C is liable. Ratio: The schizophrenic man could have done something about his condition.
This case relates to timing. It involves a doctor who later uncovers the true diagnosis. Give facts, ratio, and verdict briefly.
(Roe v Minister of Health). Doctor was not negligent but did not know important info that was later discovered. Patient sues in negligence. Held: no breach of duty. Ratio: ‘We must not look at the 1947 incident with 1954 spectacles’.
These criteria relate to the utility of conduct. What must be looked at to know whether some conduct is of utility?
A court should have regard whether steps might a) prevent a desirable activity; or b) discourage persons from undertaking functions in connection with a desirable activity.
This case relates to a woman being struck on the head with a cricket ball. Give facts, ratio, and verdict briefly.
(Bolton v Stone). A once in a lifetime cricket hit goes outside stadium and hits woman on the head. Held: no breach of duty. Ratio: probability of harm was too low.
What does gravity of harm imply? For instance: a workman prone to injury? Which case illustrates this?
If a workman is more prone to injury then greater care must be taken (Paris v Stepneg).
What happens when a precaution is unusually costly? Which case illustrates this?
If unreasonable costly precautions and measures have been taken that were reasonable (objective) then no liability (Latimer).
What does the exception of context entail? What’s an example of something in context?
Something that is dangerous and should be put into consideration ie sports.
Is horseplay a part of the exception of context? Which case illustrates this?
Yes (Blake v Galloway).
Which case illustrates for the purpose of context that balance should be balanced between added fun and added risk?
(The Secret Association v Barnes).
What is the Bolam Test?
The Bolam Test relates to the liability of a professional in accordance to informed expert opinion. If there is an informed experts opinion that’s is wide ranging then he cannot be negligent for working with that technique.
