ELS-Law and Society-Fault Flashcards
Non-legal meanings of fault.
An imperfection/blemish
An error/miscalculation
Legal meanings of fault.
Wrongdoing e.g., criminal offence or negligence.
Culpability or blameworthiness
Examples where liability is based on fault.
- Duty of care
- Breach
- Causation and remoteness
- Defences
How does duty of care show that liability is based on fault?
You are at fault if your actions adversely affect someone for whom you have a duty of care.
‘Neighbour principle’ set out established you are at fault if your actions adversely affect someone around you in society who you ought to reasonably have in mind as you go about your business.
How does breach show that liability is based on fault?
Blythe- if you do not reach the standard of a reasonable man in the circumstance, then you are at fault and therefore deemed in breach of your DoC
How does breach show that liability is NOT based on fault?
The learner driver in Nettleship v Weston
How does causation and remoteness show that liability is based on fault?
If damage occurred was not caused by you, it is not your fault. (Barnett)
Can’t be at fault where the damage which occurred is not a foreseeable result of your actions (Wagon Mound)
How does the thin skill rule show liability is NOT based on fault?
Need to take victim as you find them despite you not knowing about their condition
How do defences show that liability is based on fault?
Where the fault is shared with C, D’s damages are reduced (Brannon)
Where the C consented, fault lies with him and the D is not liable (Morris v Murray)
Examples of liability NOT based on fault.
Strict liability tort:
1. Rule from Rylands v Fletcher
2. Vicarious liability
How does the rule from Rylands v Fletcher show liability is NOT based on fault?
Water mill owner (D) got contractors to build a reservoir, they sealed it badly and it leaked into C’s mine shafts, causing damage.
Owner liable despite no fault on their part.
Case for vicarious liability showing liability is NOT based on fault.
Limpus v London General Omnibus (1863)
How does Limpus (1863) show that liability is NOT based on fault?
Bus company (D) had expressly told drivers not to race or obstruct other companies’ buses.
Employer deliberately obstructed another bus, leading to an accident.
Employer liable despite no fault on their part.
Arguments for liability should always be based on fault.
It is in interests of justice that people are not liable to pay compensation where there is no fault on their part.
Arguments for strict liability being fine and liability not always being based on fault.
- SL ensures innocent people get remedy e.g., vicarious liability
- Encourages people to take care e.g., checking work of contractors/training staff (Limpus)
