Breach of the Duty of Care

Question 1

Where is the test for determining whether a defendant has breached their duty of care laid down?

Answer 1

Blyth v Birmingham Waterworks Co

Question 2

What is the objective standard regarding learner drivers and what was the case?

Answer 2

Nettleship v Weston
He maybe doing his best however it is not good enough, morally the driver is not at fault however legally they are liable because she is insured and the risk should fall on her

Question 3

What was the objective standard in Mansfield v Weetabix?

Answer 3

The driver was not liable for the damage for his loss of control due to he did not know about his illness neither could he have reasonably known

Question 4

What is the objective standard regarding junior doctors and what is the supporting case?

Answer 4

Wilsher v Essex AHA

An inexperienced doctor must achieve the standard of a reasonably competent doctor

Question 5

What is the objective standard regarding a homeowner doing work and what is the case?

Answer 5

Wells v Cooper

The householder must conform to the standards of a reasonably competent carpenter

Question 6

What is negligence?

Answer 6

Falling below the standard of care called for by the circumstances

Question 7

What case represents an incident where reasonable care has been demonstrated in a vehicle situation?

Answer 7

Ng Chun Pui v Lee Chuen Tat

The driver who swerved and skidded when another car cut in front of him was seen to be acting reasonably

Question 8

What is the critical issue when discussing reasonable care?

Answer 8

It must be considered what the reasonable man would have foreseen

Question 9

What is the case regarding reasonable foreseeability in a medical situation?

Answer 9

Roe v Minister of Health
Medicine had invisible cracks in and led to patients being paralysed. The doctors were not held liable as they were not to know that the medicine was infected

Question 10

What are the relevant factors for breach of a duty of care?

Answer 10

1. Magnitude of risk
2. The importance of the object to be obtained by D
3. Practicability of precautions

Question 11

What are the two components to the magnitude of risk?

Answer 11

Likelihood of harm and Seriousness of Injury

Question 12

What is likelihood of harm and what is the supporting case?

Answer 12

Bolton v Stone

Question 13

What is the negligence equation?

Answer 13

Duty of care + Breach of duty + Causation of damage = Successful action in negligence

Question 14

What are the 2 stages for establishing breach?

Answer 14

What was the appropriate standard of care?

Did the defendant reach the standard?

Question 15

What is the said to be the standard of care in negligence and what case founded it?

Answer 15

‘reasonable man’ - an objective approach

Blyth v Birmingham Waterworks

Question 16

What happened in the case of Glasgow Corp v Muir?

Answer 16

It was to be stressed what the reasonable person would do in the circumstances. Here a reasonable person would not have foreseen the accident which meant there was no breach and the defendant was not liable in negligence.

Question 17

What was held in the case of Nettleship v Weston?

Answer 17

The expectation of a learner driver was that of an experienced, skilled and careful driver. She breached a standard of care and damages were awarded - (however they were reduced by 50% due to the instructors contributory negligence)

Question 18

What happened in the case of Cook v Cook?

Answer 18

It was held a duty of care was varied by the relationship between the learner driver and the instructor. If the injury was to another road user then Nettleship would apply however if they have a relationship the standard of care is lower.

Question 19

What was held in the case of Paris v Stepney BC?

Answer 19

The employee already had a medical condition and it was seen there was a higher expectation for the employer to provide protective equipment

Question 20

What are the exceptions to the objective standards?

Answer 20

Children and Illness

Question 21

What is the case regarding the objective standard of children and what was held?

Answer 21

Mullin v Richards

The standard was applied of a reasonable child of that age. There was no breach in this case

Question 22

What are the cases regarding the objective standard of illness?

Answer 22

Roberts v Ramsbottom and Mansfield v Weetabix

Question 23

What was held Roberts v Ramsbottom?

Answer 23

The defendant breached his duty of care as her drove even though he knew he had the early signs of a stroke

Question 24

What was held in Mansfield v Weetabix?

Answer 24

He bore no liability as he unknowingly slipped into a coma

Question 25

What is the objective standard when regarding a skill?

Answer 25

When the defendant is performing a task which requires a level of skill, the standard will vary according to the context.

Question 26

What was held in the case of Phillips v William Whiteley?

Answer 26

A jeweller piercing ears in a department store was not expected to reach the medical standard of cleanliness

Question 27

What was held in the case of Wells v Cooper?

Answer 27

Someone performing ‘DIY’ at home does not need to reach the standard of a professional carpenter but only the reasonable competent domestic handyman

Question 28

What case shows the objective standard required when combining a professional skill and experience and what was held?

Answer 28

The standard of care expected of a doctor was the appropriate to the post held (e.g. junior doctor) however their experience would not be taken into account.

Question 29

What test must be considered when discussing breach of duty by doctors and other professionals?

Answer 29

Bolam Test

Question 30

What situations would a special standard be granted for objective standards?

Answer 30

Sports

Professional Skills

Question 31

What is the case of Woolridge v Summer?

Answer 31

The duty of a rider to a spectator at a horse show had not been breached because he had not shown reckless disregard for safety

Question 32

What was held in Vowles v Evans?

Answer 32

CoA held thar a higher standard of care would be expected from a professional rugby referee than from an amateur

Question 33

What was held in the case of Bolam v Friern Management Committee?

Answer 33

“the test is the standard of the ordinary skilled man exercising and professing to have that special skill|”

‘A doctor is not guilty of negligence if he has acted in accordance with a practise accepted as proper by a responsible body of medical men skilled in that particular art.’

Question 34

What was held in Sideway v Board of Governors of Bethlem Royal Hospital?

Answer 34

The Bolam standard was applied to the medical duty to inform patients of risks

Question 35

What are the 2 aspects to be considered when deciding what the reasonable person would have done?

Answer 35

The magnitude of the risk

The importance of the activity undertaken by the defendant

Question 36

What was held in Bolton v Stone?

Answer 36

The defendants playing cricket was seen to be reasonable and therefore not negligent. They had reached the standard of the reasonable person and could not foresee someone would be hit with the cricket ball

Question 37

What was held in Wagon Mound No2

Answer 37

There had been a small but real risk of fire and there had been no real good reason to release the oil. The defendant failed to meet the standards of a reasonable person.

Question 38

What is said in s1 of The Compensation Act 2006?

Answer 38

Court, in considering the standard of care in negligence, should have regard to the extent to which the imposition of safety requirements could impact upon ‘desirable activities’

Question 39

Who is the burden of proof on to establish there has been a breach?

Answer 39

Claimant

Question 40

What is the standard of proof when establishing there has been a breach?

Answer 40

Civil - the balance of probabilities

Question 41

Can a criminal conviction be used to provide evidence the defendant has been negligent?

Answer 41

Yes, s11 of the Civil Evidence Act 1968

Question 42

What does ‘res ipsa loquitur’ mean?

Answer 42

The thing speaks for itself

Question 43

What three elements must be present to apply res ipsa loquitur?

Answer 43

1. The accident must be of the kind which does not normally happen in the absence of negligence
2. The cause of the accident must be under the defendants control
3. There must be no explanation of the cause of the accident

Question 44

What case supports that the event would not have happened in the absence of negligence and what was held?

Answer 44

Scott v London and St Katherine’s Dock Co

Where the plaintiff was hit by some bags of sugar which fell out of the window of a warehouse onto his head

Question 45

What happened in the case of Gee v Metropolitan Railway Co?

Answer 45

The door of a train flew open after leaving the train station causing the plaintiff to fall out. The doors were under the train company’s responsibility at the time so they were liable

Question 46

What happened in the case of Easson v London & North Eastern Railway?

Answer 46

The court held there were several opportunities to tamper with the doors so the ‘control’ condition was not met

Question 47

What was held in the case of Barkway v South Wales Transport Co Ltd?

Answer 47

Passenger on bus was injured when it crashed. It was said the cause of the crash was a burst tyre and would not have happened had the defendant conducted a proper tyre inspection

Question 48

What is the effect of imposing res ipsa and what case supports it?

Answer 48

Ng Chun Pui v Lee Cruen Tat
The legal burden of proof remains with the plaintiff if the defendant raises a plausible explanation for the accident which gives an innocent cause then the claimant will lose the case