Liability In Negligence (Tort Law)

Question 1

What is negligence?

Answer 1

An act or failure to act which causes injury or damage to another person or their property.

Question 2

What is duty of care?

Answer 2

A duty of care is where you have a responsibility/role over somebody/something. E.g. doctors have a duty of care over their patients.

Question 3

What is the Caparo test?

Answer 3

A 3-part test which replaced with the neighbour principle.

Question 4

What are the 3 parts in the caparo test?

Answer 4

• Was the damage or harm reasonably foreseeable?
• Is there a sufficiently proximate relationship between the claimant and defendant?
• Is it fair, just and reasonable to impose a duty? (All 3 must be met).

Question 5

What case links to the caparo test/duty of care?

Answer 5

Kent v Griffiths (late ambulance).
Donoghue v Stevenson (snail in bottle)(neighbour principle)
Caparo v Dickman (Company Fidelity lied about profit).

Question 6

What case links proximity of relationship?

Answer 6

Bourhill v Young - Lost baby at sight of dead motorcyclist. -No proximity.

Question 7

What is a breach of duty?

Answer 7

Is where you fail to complete/follow your duty which has lead to a consequence. Where you fail to be safe etc.. e.g. a doctor.

Question 8

What are the breaches in duty in terms of learner drivers and claims? (Case)

Answer 8

A learner is judged at the standard of the component, more experienced driver. (Nettleship v Weston)

Question 9

What case links to fair just and reasonable to impose a duty?

Answer 9

Hill v Chief Constable of West Yorkshire. (Yorkshire Ripper case) -Not a sufficient relationship between V and police.

Question 10

What is the standard set for a breach of duty?

Answer 10

The defendant who is alleged to have breached that duty of care duty of care can be regarded as the ‘reasonable person’. (In other words there were no circumstances that prevented him from doing the task completely).

Question 11

What are some of the risk factors?

Answer 11

• What is the size of the risk?
• Has claimant got any special characteristics to take account of?
• Were the risks known of at the time?
• Is there a public benefit to taking a risk?

Question 12

What case links to size of the risk?

Answer 12

Bolton v Stone - not negligent. (Cricket ball hit woman outside ground). Greater care to be taken if higher chance of risk.

Question 13

What is damage?

Answer 13

• Damage is the actual consequence of the action.

- Damages is not the same. It is the remedy.

Question 14

What is remoteness of damage?

Answer 14

If defendant who is being sued for negligence can prove that the damage occurred was such a remote possibility, then they will win case and not pay compensation.

Question 15

What is reasonably foreseeable harm?

Answer 15

-The defendant can be liable if the type of injury was reasonably foreseeable and the defendant could have predicted or expected it from his actions.

Question 15

What case links to remoteness of damage?

Answer 15

The wagon mound. (Oil spillage- not reasonably foreseeable). Injury or damage can be claimed if reasonably foreseeable.

Question 16

What is take your victim as you find him?

Answer 16

If claimant has a pre-existing condition that is made worse by an injury that was reasonably foreseeable, than the defendant can also be held liable. (Thin-skull rule).

Question 17

What is Res ipsa ioquitor?

Answer 17

Means the ‘thing speaks for itself’. In certain situations, the claimant may not know exactly what happened, only that a breach of care or negligence has occurred and that he has suffered an injury or damage. E.g. operation gone wrong.