Negligence Flashcards
How does a duty of care arise?
Within established relationships (e.g. employers, teachers, parents, manufacturers, vehicle drivers) and where the Caparo test applies
What is the Caparo test?
- That harm to C from D’s breach is reasonably foreseeable
- There is a relationship of proximity between C and D
- It is fair, just and reasonable to impose a duty of care
In what relationship does a duty of care never arise?
Police to crime victims
When does a duty to act arise?
Only where D assumed responsibility to C, where D created a dangerous situation, where D exercised control over C, or where there is a special relationship between C and D
What duty of care does a rescuer have?
Duty not to worsen the situation
What duty of care does a doctor have in context of medical treatments?
Duty to inform the patient of all material risks (risks that the patient considers important)
When does D owe a duty of care over the acts of a third party, as not to cause harm to C?
Only where D exercises control over the third party, or where D had assumed responsibility for the third party’s actions
Who has the burden of proof when proving breach of duty + causation?
The claimant
What is the standard of judging a breach of duty?
Judged objectively, and lack of experience or knowledge is always irrelevant
Children - judged by a reasonable child of the same age
Professionals with special skills - judged by whether they acted in accordance with the majority opinion of a professional body
Can D claim that they were inexperienced and so did not breach their duty?
No, lack of experience or knowledge is irrelevant
What are the types of causation?
Legal Causation - no intervening acts from a third party and no grossly unreasonable acts from C, and the TYPE of loss is reasonably foreseeable
(but note the egg shell rule)
Factual Causation - but for test
What if the manner of loss was unforeseeable?
It does not matter, as long as the type of harm was foreseeable
Breach of duty - what does C need to show if they may have contributed to their loss?
That D’s act was ‘more likely than not’ to have caused the loss
Breach of duty - what does C need to show if there are multiple potential causes?
That D’s act was a ‘material contribution’ to the loss
Breach of duty - what happens if there is successive harm caused by multiple defendants?
Later defendants will only be liable if they cause new damage/worsen damage