Negligence Flashcards
Donoghue v Stevenson (1932)
DUTY OF CARE:
Snail in a bottle case. Neighbour Principle (Anyone directly effected by your actions)
Hill v Chief Constable of West Yorkshire Police (1989)
DUTY OF CARE:
Mother of the last victim of the Yorkshire ripper wanted compensation. Police refused as it would “Open the floodgates”
Robinson v Chief Constable of West Yorkshire Police (2018)
DUTY OF CARE:
(Here’s to you) Mrs Robinson witnessed an arrest and was knocked over by police while they were arresting the bloke. She sustained injuries, The police owe a duty of care to bystanders
Caparo Industries PLC v Dickman (Caparo Test) (1990)
NEW DoC SITUATIONS:
1. Was damage reasonably foreseeable
2. Was there sufficient proximity between C and D
3. Is it just and far to impose a duty of care
Bourhill v Young (1943)
REASONABLY FORESEEABLE:
Not foreseeable that a woman would suffer a miscarriage after hearing a motorbike accident. Motorist did not owe a duty of care.
McLoughlin v O’Brian (1983)
SUFFICIENT PROXIMITY:
C was able to claim compensation for shock after a lorry driver caused an accident to her family. C did not witness the accident but she saw her family at the hospital.
Griffiths v Lindsay (1998)
FAIR & JUST:
Courts decided that it’s not fair for a taxi driver to owe compensation to a drunk passenger who got ran over as they got out of the car.
Nettleship v Western (1971)
BREACH OF DUTY:
D was receiving driving lessons and she crashed the car into C’s leg. The standard of care of a learner is just as great as the SoC of someone who had passed.
Mullin v Richards (1998)
BREACH OF DUTY (AGE):
2 15 year old schoolgirls, playfighting with rulers. one shattered and went into the others eye. Could not claim as neither of them realised it was dangerous.
Paris v Stepney Borough Council (1951)
BREACH OF DUTY (CHARACTERISTICS):
C was blinded of work. Employer owed a higher standard of care to an employee who was more at risk.
Bolton v Stone (1951)
BREACH OF DUTY (MAGNITUDE):
Ball was hit out of cricket ground and hit C. This was very rare so the owners did not owner a duty of care
Watt v Hertfordshire County Council (1954)
BREACH OF DUTY (BENEFITS):
Fire brigade transported equipment on a too small fire engine. The gear fell off and injured a claimant. The fire department were not liable as the benefits outweighed the risk.
Barnett v Chelsea & Kensington Hospital Management Committee (1968)
CAUSATION (BUT FOR):
3 Night watchmen were sick because they drank arsenic tea. The doctor did not know they had arsenic poisoning and sent them home. Doctor did not cause their death as they would’ve died anyway.
Wilsher v Essex Area Health Authority (1988)
CAUSATION (MULTIPLE CAUSES):
C had gone blind. There were 6 possible causes of the blindness. Doctors negligence had been one of the 6 so doctor was not negligent.
Scott v Shepherd (1773)
LEGAL CAUSATION:
D threw a squib into a marketplace. 2 other people threw it along before it exploded and hurt someone. Chain of causation was not broken by the other people throwing it so D was liable.
Robinson v Post Office (1974)
LEGAL CAUSATION:
C slipped on ladder due to employers negligence. At hospital he was given a tetanus shot which he was allergic to. Employers were still liable as he wouldn’t have been at the hospital is it wasn’t for them.
Carslogie Steamship Co Ltd v Royal Norwegian Government (1952)
LEGAL CAUSATION: (NATURAL INTERVENTION):
Defendant was responsible for damage to a ship as the result of a storm.
Smith v Leech Brain & Co. Ltd (1961)
THIN SKULL RULE:
Widow’s claim for damages arising from an accident to her husband. His lip was scolded by molten metal and he got cancer. Injury was foreseeable so the employer was liable.
Wagon Mound (1961)
REMOTENESS:
Negligent oil spill from D’s tanker floated into Sydney harbour. Sparks from welding ignited this and it exploded. This was very remote so D was not liable as it was not foreseeable.
Hughes v Lord Advocate (1963)
REMOTENESS:
Post office left manhole unattended with paraffin lamps. A boy fell down and burned himself badly. Even though it was not likely to happen. The TYPE of damage likely to happen, happened. It doesn’t matter how bad the type is.
Jolley v Sutton London Borough Council (2000)
REMOTENESS:
The council owned block of flats. Boat was brought onto the block and was abandoned. The kids would play on it. The council said it would be removed but it never would be. Some boys were working on boat and it collapsed. Council was liable as it was foreseeable that children would play on the boat.
