Negligence

Question 1

Where and how was negligence defined

Answer 1

Defined in Blyth v Birmingham water works as omitting to do something a reasonable man would do or doing something a reasonable man wouldn’t do

Question 2

4 requirements for negligence to be proven

Answer 2

1. Must be a duty of care in place
   2.Breach in that duty
2. Breach caused ‘harm in fact’
   4.The harm should be as a direct breach of that duty of care - wouldn’t have happened but for the breach

Question 3

Further factors in determining whether the D acted reasonably

Answer 3

1. Degree of risk involved - greater risk involved, the more precaution a D will have to take to minimise the risk - Bolton v Stone
2. Cost of precautions - D must take reasonable precautions given the circumstances - Latima v AEC
3. Potential seriousness of injury - the more serious the potential injury the greater the level of care required from the D - Paris v Stephney borough council
4. Importance of activity - some risk may be accepted if the risk undertaken is socially acceptable - Watt v Hertfordshire county council

Question 4

3 main points from Lord Atkin to constitute a duty of care/ caparo test

Answer 4

1. Concept of foreseeability of harm
2. Claimant and defendant being in a relationship of proximity
3. It being fair, just and reasonable to impose liability on the D for his careless actions

Question 5

Donoghue v Stevenson

Answer 5

Neighbour principle

Question 6

Caparo v Dickman

Answer 6

• Only used in novel cases

Question 7

Robinson v Chief constable of west Yorkshire

Answer 7

Held that Caparo should only be used in novel cases