Liability in Negligence Flashcards
Definition of Negligence
Baron Anderson - Blyth v Birmingham Waterworks
‘Act or omission which the reasonable man in the same circumstance would not do’
How to establish negligence
Establish a duty
Establish a breach
Causation in Law
Causation in fact
Neighbour Principle
Donoghue v Stevenson - Lord Atkin
‘Taking care to avoid any act or omission that one can reasonably forsee to injure their neighbour’
Caparo v Dickman 1990
- Incrementally and by analogy
- 3 stage test
3 stage test
Reasonably foreeable
Proximity
Fair, just and reaonsbale
IS Reasonable foreseeable
Kent v Griffiths 2000
- Reasonable foreseeable that delay or failure to turn up of an ambulance would lead to further injury
NOT Reasonable foreseeable
Topp v London County Bus 1993
- Not reasonable foreseeable that bus to be stolen and injure someone when left an changover as it normally only took 9mins
IS Proximate
McLoughlin v O’Brien 1983
- Wife found husband in hospital in same condition as he was after crash, no treatment and suffered shock
- Proximity of relationship even tho there was no proximity of time or space as she wasnt involved
NOT Proximate
Bourhill v Young
- Pregnant woman heard accident and went to see it, saw the aftermath and claimed it led to a misscarriage
- No relationship of space or relationship
IS Fair just and reasonable
Reeves v MPC
- Suspect was known sucide risk
NOT Fair, just and reasonable
Orange v Chief Constable of West Yorkshire
- not known risk of sucide
Standard of Care
Reasonable Man
Blyth
Ordinary Person doing task Standard of Care
Wells v Cooper - held to standard of competent person
Learner
Nettleship v Weston
- Held to standard of experienced and capable person
Young Person
Orchard v Lee
- Lower standard
Professional
Bolam
- held to standard of other professionals
C-In-L Type of injury reasonably forceable
Wagon Mound no. 1951
Too remote from original act
Scale of injury need NOT be foreseeable
Hughes v Lord Advocate 1963
Type of risk not foreseeable but risk of burning was
Thin Skull Rule
Smith v Leech Brain
Pre existing canercous conditon
Thin Skull Rule
Smith v Leech Brain
Pre existing canercous condition
Primary Victims
Duleiu v White 1901
Horse and carriage crashed into pub
Primary Victims
Duleiu v White 1901
Horse and carriage crashed into pub
Seoncdayr Victims
Hambrook v Stoke Brothers - Lorry speeding toward childrenn
Obiter dicta Lord Bankes - 2 mothers
Control Mechanisms
Alcock v Chief constable of South Yorkshire
- Relationship close ties of love and affection
Rescuers
Chadwick v British Transport Commission
- Trail derailment suffered anxiety neurosis
Bystanders
McFarlane v Caledonia
Bystanders unable to sue unless they have close ties or proximity
Causation in Fact - But for
Barnett v Chelsea and Kensington HMC
- 3 nighteatchemnt
- would have died either way
