Duty of Care (Negligence) Flashcards
Negligence - definition
A breach by the defendant of a legal duty of care owed to the claimant that results in actionable damage to the claimant unintended by the defendant
Four elements of Negligence
Duty of care
Breach of duty
Causation
Defences
Two types of situation
Novel duty situation
Established duty situation
Established duty situation:
One road user to another
London Passenger Transport Board v Upson
Established duty situation:
Defendant to rescuer, where D has created dangerous situation so that it is reasonable that somebody may attempt rescue
Baker v Hopkins
Established duty situation:
Driver to pedestrians and passengers
Netteship v Weston
Established duty situation:
Referee to sport players
Vowles v Evans
Established duty situation:
Advocate to client
Arthur J S Hall v Simons
Established duty situation:
Ambulance service to emergency callers (in limited situations)
Kent v Griffiths
NO established duty situation:
Soldier to colleague
Mulcahy v Ministry of Defence
No established duty situation:
Fire service to emergency caller
Capital and Counties
Tests for novel duty situations
Donoghue v Stevenson (wide rule)
Caparo Industries v Dickman
Donoghue v Stevenson
‘You must take reasonable care to avoid acts or omissions which you can reasonably foresee would be likely to injure your neighbour’
Caparo Industries v Dickman
a. Is it reasonably foreseeable that defendant’s actions will affect this particular claimant?
b. Is there sufficient proximity of relationship between claimant and defendant?
c. Is it fair, just and reasonable to impose a duty?
Brooks v Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis
Police do not owe a duty of care to individuals (only to public at large)
Exceptions to Brooks v Commissioner rule
- Where police have assumed responsibility for someone or someone has been entrusted to their care
- May owe a duty of care to take action with reasonable care
- To keep ID of informants safe
General rule for omissions
There is no liability for pure omissions, and you do not owe a duty to the world for doing nothing to prevent harm
(Stovin v Wise)
East Suffolk Rivers Catchment Board
The omission rule applies if you decide to act despite no duty to do so, unless you make matters worse
Home Office v Dorset Yacht
There is a duty to act positively in cases where a person has a special relationship of control over another
