negligence. Flashcards
What was the status of negligence as a legal claim before the 20th century?
Up until the 1900s, negligence was not a separate tort on its ownThe term “negligence” was used to mean carelessness or not paying attentionbut it didn’t automatically mean someone could be sued for it.
When did negligence start to develop as a basis for legal liability?
In the 1900 century negligence started to become its own tort, holding the defendant legally responsible. But it would be hard for most defendants to get compensated.
- What did the case of Heaven v. Pender (1883) suggest about negligence?
It suggested that people might have a general responsibility to use “ordinary care” to avoid causing harm to others, which is like the modern idea of a duty of care.
- What did the case of Lievre v. Gould (1893) emphasize?
The court decided that if there was no contract, a person had no responsibility to act carefully.
Which case formally established negligence as a distinct area of law?
An important case in establishing negligence law is the Donoghue v Stevenson 1932 case. This case stated that people have a duty to not harm other people even if there is no contract between them.
- What are the four elements needed to prove negligence as established by the 20th century?
Duty of care.
The defendant had a legal duty to avoid harm to the plaintiff.
Breach of duty.
The defendant didn’t meet the standard of care to the plaintiff, causing harm to the plaintiff.
Causation.
The breach of duty caused the harm.
Loss or damage.
The plaintiff suffered a loss or injury because of the defendant
- What is the “neighbor principle” established in Donoghue v. Stevenson?
- The “neighbor principle” established by Lord Atkins, holds that people must take care of their neighbour in law. which is to avoid harming others whom could be affected directly by your actions.
Why was Donoghue v. Stevenson (1932) a landmark case in negligence law?
that manufactures could own a duty of care to consumers, even without a direct contract. they could be liable for harm caused to consumers because of their product.
- What was the significance of Grant v. Australian Knitting Mills (1935)?
This case reinforced that manufacturers owe a duty of care to consumers, even if a third party could inspect the product before harm occurred. This case confirmed that manufacturers must ensure their products are safe for consumers, even if someone else could inspect the product before it caused harm.)
- What role did the industrial revolution play in the development of negligence law?
- Answer: Industrialization brought more accidents among strangers (e.g., railroads, factories), which led to the legal question of whether a general duty of care should apply even without direct relationships.
- What was the precedent set by Mullen v. AG Barr (1929) and how did it impact Donoghue v. Stevenson?
In this case the court ruled that manufactures only owe a duty of care to consumers if they had a direct contract.This reasoning initially led to the rejection of Donoghue case. but was later taken to the house of lord to be looked at.
- How did Lord Atkin’s views differ from the traditional legal views on duty of care?
Lord Atkin argued for a general duty of care to “neighbors,” suggesting that people have obligations to prevent harm to those they could foreseeably affect, a moral as well as legal perspective that expanded the scope of duty.
- Why was Hedley Byrne & Co Ltd v. Heller & Partners Ltd (1964) significant in negligence law?
It established that professionals ( like lawyers or bankers) can be liable for providing negligent advice if people rely on that advice, extending the duty of care to situations involving economic harm.
- What limitations did courts place on the expansion of negligence law in the late 20th century?
Courts began limiting negligence claims by considering policy factors like fairness and justice, to prevent an overwhelming number of claims and refine the application of the duty of care.
- What are the policy concerns with expanding negligence law too broadly?
Concerns include fairness, preventing excessive litigation, and managing the societal impact of recognizing too many negligence claims, leading to a refined approach in the 1990s.
