duty of care

Question 1

what are the three things that establish the duty of care in the Caparo test

Answer 1

1. was harm foreseeable
2. was there sufficient proximity in time, space or relationship
3. was it fair, just and reasonable to impose a duty of care

Question 2

Kent V Griffith

Answer 2

Ambulance failed to arrive on time, claimant was suffering from an asthma attack and as a result the claimant suffered from respiratory arrest

(WAS HARM FORESEEABLE)

Question 3

Bourhill v Young

Answer 3

Pregnant woman approached the scene of an accident of a motorcyclist who have died, she suffered from shock and gave birth to a stillborn
- She sued the relatives of the motorcyclist but the House of Lords said the motorcyclist could not have anticipated this so she failed to win the case

(WAS THERE SUFFICIENT PROXIMITY IN TIME, SPACE OR RELATIONSHIP)

Question 4

Hill v CC of West Yorkshire Police

Answer 4

mother of the last victim from the Yorkshire Ripper stated the police had duty of care to her daughter as they had enough information to arrest the killer but failed
-The House of Lords said there was no way of knowing when the next victim, so it was not fair and the police had a public policy to owe duty of care to everyone, not to a specific person

so KLP is there would be no reason not to impose a duty of care but EMERGENCY SERVICES ARE USUALLY EXEMPT FROM DUTY OF CARE

(WAS IT FAIR, JUST AND REASONABLE TO IMPOSE A DUTY OF CARE)

Question 5

structure

Answer 5

1. mention test
2. mention relevant cases
3. application

EG, 1. was harm foreseeable?

   2. in Kent v Griffith...
   3. In XYZ’s case...