(GREEN) Negligence Cases Flashcards
1
Q
Donoghue V Stevenson
A
- decomposed snail in her ginger beer
- duty of care
- breach
- damage
‘You must take reasonable care to avoid acts or omissions which you can reasonably foresee would be likely to injure your neighbour’
2
Q
Robinson V Chief Constable of West Yorkshire Police
A
- police, injured 78 year old bystander,
- ‘established legal principle’, a duty of care assumed
3
Q
Caparo V Dickman
A
- outlined 3 stage test to establish duty of care
- Forseeability
- Proximity
- Fair, Just, and Reasonable
4
Q
Kent V Griffiths
A
- Ambulance, ignored 3 calls from doctor, after pregnant lady stopped breathing, baby lost, memory loss
- duty of care if foreseeable
- L
5
Q
Doughty V Turner Manufacturing
A
- An asbestos lid, molten liquid, new chemical reaction, explosion
- If not foreseeable, no duty of care
- NL
6
Q
Bourhill V Young
A
- Mrs Bourhill pregnant on a bus, young crashed motorcycle in front of the bus, Mrs Bourhill walked down the road to see and had a miscarriage
- No duty of care if not in proximity - time & space
- NL
7
Q
Munroe V London Fire Brigade
A
- emergency services, not checking neighbouring buildings for debris
- no DOC for omissions (only acts), not in best interests of society - open floodgates
- NL
8
Q
Nettleship V Weston
A
- learner driver accident, held to standards of qualified driver
- objective standard, incompetent best not good enough
- L
9
Q
Mullins V Richards
A
- 15 year old girls ruler fighting, claimant lost eye
- Shown the standards of care of average 15 year old
- NL
10
Q
Orchard V lee
A
- playground supervisor, injured by 13 year old playing tag, normal activity
- child have to be careless to a very high degree before any breach
- NL
11
Q
Bolam
A
- following standards laid down by professional body, competent standards
- NL
12
Q
Wells V Cooper
A
- Carpenter, door handle, later injured claimant
- Standard of care imposed of a reasonably skilled person, no requirement to be perfect
- NL
13
Q
Bolton V Stone
A
- cricketball, 78 yards, 17 foot, 6 times 30 years
- It was not foreseeable, happens every 5 years
- NL
14
Q
Latimer V AEC
A
- flood, accident, large costs
- Large cost of precautions
- NL
15
Q
Paris V Stepney
A
-1 eye, goggles, lost eye
- Risk of serious injury
- L
16
Q
Watt V Hertfordshire
A
- fireman, heavy jack, not secure,
- Importance of activity or social utility needs to be considered
- NL
17
Q
Smith V Leech Brain
A
- molten metal, minor lip burn, dormant cancer
- defendant may be liable even for unforeseeable loss if loss due to an existing condition or weakness in claimant
- L
18
Q
Hughes V Lord advocate
A
- 2 boys,manhole,oil lamp, explosion, burnt
- Even though explosion was not foreseeable, being burnt was
- L, successfully sued
19
Q
Barnet V Chelsea Hospital management committee
A
- vomiting, turned away hospital, arsenic poisoning
- would have died regardless
- NL
20
Q
Scott V Shepherd
A
- Lit firework, market hall, explode
- No break in the chain of causation
- L
21
Q
Wilsher V Essex Area Health Authority
A
- junior doctors lack of experience not taken into account
- Held to objective standard
- L
22
Q
Bailey V MOD and Portsmouth NHS Trust
A
- MOD hospital, transfer NHS, heart attack, weakened-poor treatment at MOD
- Doctors negligence materially increased risk of injury
- L
23
Q
Sayers V Harlow DC
A
- bus garage toilet, fell out window
- But for her trying to climb out, she wouldn’t have been injured
- 25% to blame, reduction in damages
24
Q
Refill V Newberry
A
Entered defendant land to steal, accidentally shot
Burglar contributed to negligence
L
25
Yachuk V Oliver
9 year old, gasoline, burn, company negligence
A child would have to be reckless to a high degree for their age for a successful defence
Not Liable/ No partial defence
26
Sylvester V Chapman
Smouldering cigarette, leopard cage, maul
Where a claimant voluntarily consents to a risk, they cannot sue for damages
No defence
27
Woolbridge V Sumner
Spectators, sporting,
Assumed risk of harm provided players not reckless or intentional
NL
28
Smoldon V WhitWorth
U19 rugby match, scrum collapsed, boy injured
Where rules are not kept to, volenti cannot be used
L
29
Haynes V Harwood
Horses, busy street, police
Where there is a moral duty to stage a rescue there was no consent as no choice
NL
30
Cutler V United Dairies
Horse bolt,field, rescue
No immediate risk so volenti could apply
Owner NL
31
Nichols V Marsland
Lakes flooded, most violent thunderstorm in living memory, 4 bridges
Severe unanticipated event for which no human is responsible
NL
32
Cope V Sharp
Fire, vegetation destroyed to prevent fire, reasonable
Entitled to take action that is urgently necessary to prevent a greater evil
NL
33
Stanley V Powell
Bullet ricocheted, tree
Reasonable precautions are taken by the claimant, despite this accident could not be prevented
NL
34
3 Points to be proven
1. Duty of care
2. Breach
3. Damage
35
Caparo 3 test
1. forseeability
2. Proximity
3. Fair, just and reasonable
36
Reasonable person test
Held to objective standard
“Learner driver may be doing their best, but their incompetent best isn’t good enough”
37
Factors to decide if conduct is reasonable
1. Likelihood of injury
2. Cost of precautions
3. Potential seriousness of injury
4. Important of activity or social utility
38
Likelihood of injury
Bolton v stone
39
Cost of precautions
Latimer v AFC
40
Potential seriousness of injury
Paris v stepney
41
Importance of social activity
Watt v Hertfordshire
42
Factual causation
‘But for’ test
43
Contributory negligence
Refill v Newbury - shot stealing
