duty of care

Question 1

what is a duty of care?

Answer 1

a relationship or circumstance where one party legally owes care to another i.e doctor to patient. failure to take such care can result in the defendant being liable to pay damages.

Question 2

what case did duty of care for personal injury and property damages originates from?

Answer 2

Donoghue v Stevenson Resulted in: HOL declared manufacturers owed a duty of care to consumers as injured party did not buy the drink only consumed it.

Question 3

what are the 3 cases that established the rules about duty of care?

Answer 3

1. Donoghue v Stevenson c reated the “neighbour principle”
2. Caparo introduced a 3 part test to establish whether a duty of care was owed
3. Robinson stated that whilst the Caparo still remains good law, it should only be used for novel ( new) situations

Question 4

what are the 3 tests of caparo?

Answer 4

• Was the damage or harm reasonably foreseeable?
• Is there a sufficient proximate (close) relationship between the claimant and the defendant? (in time, space or relationship)
• Is it fair, just and reasonable to impose a duty of care?

Question 5

case example for Foreseeability Test 1 of Caparo?

Answer 5

Kent case - an ambulance failed to arrive on time and the claimant suffered a heart attack. It was ‘reasonably foreseeable’

Question 6

case eaxample for Proximity Test 2 of Caparo ?

Answer 6

Young case - woman gave birth to a still born baby claimed it was because she saw blood on the road from a motorcycle accident. There was not sufficient proximity in space, time or relationship
McLoughlin case - family in accident she saw her family before they were treated and suffered severe shock, depression and a personality change
There was sufficient proximity as she had seen the immediate aftermath of the event

Question 7

case example for is it fair, just and reasonable to impose a duty? Caparo test 3?

Answer 7

Mulcahy case - soldier suffered damage to his hearing. although both factors of foreseeability and proximity were present, the facts of the case required them to consider this policy issue. (floodgates)
Robinson v Chief Constable of West Yorkshire Police - 3 police men landed on top of the woman who suffered injury as a result.The police are not immune to liability in negligence: a duty of care may be imposed on the police in the same situations as it may be imposed on any private individual