Negligence Flashcards
Caparo Industries v Dickman
Company accounts not checked properly; introduced modern test for duty of care
Kent v Griffiths
Ambulance didn’t arrive, harm was reasonably foreseeable
Jolley v Sutton London Borough Council
Boat fell on boy paralysing him, harm was reasonably foreseeable
Topp v London Country Bus
Not reasonably foreseeable that stolen bus would kill cyclist
Bourhill v Young
No foreseeability or proximity owed for miscarriage at car crash
McLoughlin v O’Brien
Proximity in relationship between mum & car crash victims
Hill v Chief Constable of West Yorkshire
No proximity or FJR to Ripper’s last victim by police
Harris v Perry
No need for constant supervision at family parties, not FJR
Hall v Simons
Lawyers no longer immune from being sued
Sirros v Moore
Judges are immune from being sued (is this FJR?)
Reeves v MPC
Duty was owed by police as knew he was suicide risk
Michael v CC South Wales Police
Not FJR for police to be responsible for a third party criminal’s actions
Robinson v CC West Yorkshire
Police not immune for own wrongs. Robinson approach = use past precedents to show duty (or no duty)
What standard did Baron Alderson give in lyth v Birmingham Waterworks?
The standard of the ‘reasonable man’.
What was the ruling in Roe v Minister of Health regarding cracks in glass?
Cracks in glass were not known of, therefore not a foreseeable risk.
What was determined in Walker v Northumberland County Council about the second nervous breakdown?
The second nervous breakdown was foreseeable if things didn’t change after the first one.
What was the ruling in Bolton v Stone regarding the risk of being hit by a cricket ball?
Only a very small risk of being hit by a cricket ball; the fence was tall enough precaution.
What was the significance of the risk of being blinded in Paris v Stepney Borough Council?
The risk of being blinded was worse to C as he was already blind in one eye.
What did the court decide in Watt v Hertfordshire County Council regarding saving a woman’s life?
Saving the woman’s life outweighed the risk of potential harm to firefighters, making it a reasonable risk to take.
What precautions did the owners take in Latimer v AEC regarding a flooded factory?
The flooded factory owners had taken enough precautions to be reasonable.
What did the court say in Re Herald of Free Enterprise about leaving bow doors open?
Despite it being common, the court said it wasn’t what a reasonable man would do.
How were the girls in Mullins v Richards compared?
Girls playing with rulers were compared to reasonably competent 15-year-old girls.
What was the expectation for the learner driver in Nettleship v Weston?
The learner driver was expected to drive at a reasonably competent standard.
What standard is expected in Wells v Cooper for amateur DIY?
Amateur DIY still needs to be done to a reasonably competent standard.
How is a jeweller compared in Phillips v Whiteley?
A jeweller piercing ears is compared to a reasonably competent jeweller, not a surgeon.
What was the ruling in Bolam v Friern Hospital regarding electroshock therapy?
Electroshock therapy without drugs was reasonable if backed up by a competent body of medical opinion.
What was expected of junior doctors in Wilsher v Essex Area Health Authority?
Junior doctors were still expected to act to a reasonably competent standard.
What was determined in Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority regarding a toddler not being intubated?
Even if the action is backed up by a body of opinion, it must still be reasonable.
What was the breach of duty in Montgomery v Lanarkshire HB?
The doctor breached duty as unreasonably didn’t give a caesarean alternative.
Barnett v Chelsea and Kensington Hospital Management Committee
Poisoned tea; doctor didn’t cause damage as he would’ve died anyway.
Baker v Willoughby
Defendant still liable for ankle injury even after leg was amputated.
McKew v Holland Hannen Cubitts
Jumped down stairs after his leg gave way; his unreasonable act broke the chain of causation.
Carslogie Steamship v Royal Norwegian Government
Storm broke the chain of causation and destroyed the ship.
Knightley v Johns
Instructions to drive against traffic from senior officer broke the chain of causation.
Wagon Mound Claim 1
Defendant only liable for foreseeable consequences of breach, i.e., oil damage.
Bradford v Robinson Rentals
A cold-related injury was foreseeable, even if frostbite wasn’t.
Hughes v Lord Advocate
Burns were foreseeable from children playing near oil lamps, even if the explosion was not.
Smith v Leech Brain
Liable for splash triggering cancer cells even though claimant didn’t know he had them.
Wagon Mound Claim 2
6 years later, different boat owners, different judge ruled the fire damage as foreseeable!
