Negligence

Question 1

Breach of Duty

What must damage be caused by?

What mustn’t damage be?
Case -

How do you prove factual causation?
Case -

How do you prove legal causation?
Case? -

Answer 1

A breach of duty

Damage must no be too remote
The wagon mound

With the but for rule
Barnett v Chelsea

Foreseeability of damage - Hugh’s v lord advocate

Question 2

Breach of Duty

What five risk elements of A breach of duty

1
Case -

2
Case -

3
Case -

4
Case -

5
Case -

Answer 2

Special characteristics
Case - Paris v Stepney borough council

Size of risk
Case - Bolton v stone

Appropriate precautions
Case - Latimer

Unknown risks
Case - Roe v minister of health

Public benefit
Case - Watt v Hertfordshire council

Question 3

Breach of Duty

What is the reasonable man judged against?

What are professionals judged against?
Case -

What are learners judged against?
Case -

Answer 3

The ordinary person completing the task competently

Professionals
Case - Bolam

Professionals
Case - Nettleship v Weston

Question 4

Duty of Care

The Caparo tests

Three steps

1 + case
2 + case
3 + case

Answer 4

1 - injury/damage must be foreseeable

Case - Kent v Griffiths

2 - Proximity of a relationship

Case - Bourhill V young

3 - fair just and reasonable to impose a duty

Case - Hill v Chief constable

Question 5

Duty of Care

What case establishes the neighbour principle?

What case further developed this principe into three rules?

Answer 5

Donoghue v Stephenson

Caparo v Dickman

Question 6

Remoteness of Damage

Legal -

Factual -

Thin skull rule -

Answer 6

Legal - foreseeability + Hugh’s v Lord Advocate

Factual - But for rule + Barnett v Chelsea

Remoteness - The wagon mound case

Thin skull rule - Smith V leech