negligence Flashcards

You may prefer our related Brainscape-certified flashcards:
1
Q

donoghue v stevenson

A

created negligence

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

robinson v CCOWY

A

duty proved in past case, it will be in this one

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

caparo

A

if it says “novel case”
1) reasonable person foresee damage?
2) proximity?
3) fair, just, reasonable to impose duty?

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

jolley v sutton

A

caparo test worked

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

blyth

A

defines breach as doing something a reasonable person wouldnt or vise versa

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

nettleship v weston

A

inexperience does not change standard of care

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

bolom

A

professionalism increases standard of care

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

wells v cooper

A

not acting as a professional (low SOC)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

mullin v richards

A

age decreases standard of care

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

miller v jackson

A

size of risk

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

paris

A

-seriousness of potential harm
-practicability of precautions

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

watt v HCC

A

benefit of risk

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

barnett

A

but for

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

reeves v MCC

A

acts of victim

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

wilkin-shaw v fuller

A

third party

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

wagon mound

A

(remoteness) can only sue for foreseeable damage

17
Q

hughes v LA

A

HOW damage happened, doesnt have to be foreseeable

18
Q

bradford v robinsons rentals

A

EXTENT of damage doesnt have to be foreseeable

19
Q

egg shell skull rule

A

C’s vulnerability does not make damage too remote

20
Q

contributory negligence

A

-partial defence
- law reform act, reduces damages
-sayers v harlow, contributory worked, she took a risk

21
Q

volenti order of proof

A

1) c knows precise risk
2) able to excercise free choice
3)voluntarily accepted risk

22
Q

stermer v lawson

A

c must know precise risk, not general

23
Q

smith v baker

A

forced into accepting risk (free choice)

24
Q

ICI v shatwell

A

chose to ignore instructions (accepted risk)