Negligence

Question 1

Duty of care

Answer 1

Establish a legal relationship between the parties

Question 2

Robinson 2018

Answer 2

Older lady sued police force even though it is hard to sue

Question 3

statute based

Answer 3

If a law states a duty is owed

Question 4

precedent

Answer 4

Donoghue v Stephenson

Question 5

Donoghue v Stephenson

Answer 5

lady found a snail in her drink, couldn’t sue since she didn’t buy it

Question 6

Caparo three part test

Answer 6

• reasonably foreseeable
• proximity
• fair, just and reasonable

Question 7

Caparo v Dickman

Answer 7

Caparo wished to take over a company and relied on wrongly prepared accounts by Dickman, couldn’t sue as they had not been prepared

Question 8

reasonably foreseeable harm

Answer 8

would a reasonable person in D’s position have foreseen that the C might be injured or suffer damage to their property

Question 9

proximity (& case)

Answer 9

a duty of care will only exist if the relationship between C and Dis close enough(Bourhill v Young)

Question 10

Bourhill v young

Answer 10

young crashed his motorcycle in tragic accident, Bourhill later saw a bit of blood after the clean up, went into shock and had a still born. failed the claim

Question 11

fair, just and reasonable (& case)

Answer 11

impose a duty of public authorities because it my lead to defence working and be counterproductive (Hill v Chief constable of west Yorkshire police)

Question 12

hill v chief constable of west Yorkshire police

Answer 12

criticised for not finding the Yorkshire ripper fast enough, wasn’t fair to place blame on the police for not finding him quick enough

Question 13

breach of duty

Answer 13

the standard is set by the reasonable man

Question 14

reasonable characteristics of D

Answer 14

• professional
• learner
• child

Question 15

Professional

Answer 15

person/expert with special skills or training they are expected to reach the standards of an ordinary competent professional in that role

Question 16

Bolam v Friern Barnet Hospital

Answer 16

c was suffering from mental illness and given treatment, not informed the risked and suffered broken pelvis, doctor had not breached his duty as he reached standards of ordinary competent doctor

Question 17

learners

Answer 17

they are expected to reach the standard of the ordinary competent qualified person

Question 18

nettleship v weston

Answer 18

a learner drier is expected to meet the same standard as a reasonable qualified competent driver

Question 19

children

Answer 19

they are expected to reach the standard of a reasonable person of the D’s age at the time of the accident

Question 20

risk factors (5)

Answer 20

1. vulnerable victim
2. size of risk
3. practical precautions
4. public benefit of raking the risk
5. knowledge of the danger

Question 21

vulnerable victim

Answer 21

if special characteristics such as illness or disability of the C are known to the D

Question 22

size of the risk

Answer 22

smaller risks are fine, bigger risks are dangerous

Question 23

practical precautions

Answer 23

the courts will balance the risk involve against the cost/effort of taking practical precautions

Question 24

public benefit of taking the risk

Answer 24

if there is an emergency and the benefits outweigh the risk

Question 25

knowledge of the danger

Answer 25

if the risk of harm/danger is not known there is no liability

Question 26

causation

Answer 26

• factual
• legal
• think skull rule

Question 27

factual causation

Answer 27

defined by “But for” test

Question 28

legal causation

Answer 28

an intervening act can break the chain of causation, only when foreseeable

Question 29

thin skull rule

Answer 29

d must take the c as they find them, if the type of injury is foreseeable but due to the c pre-existing condition this is made worse, the d will still be liable for the damage caused

Question 30

remoteness of damage

Answer 30

d will only be liable for injury or damage that is reasonable foreseeable

Question 31

defences

Answer 31

• contributory negligence

- consent

Question 32

contributory negligence

Answer 32

if c suffers damage partly through their own actions, contributory negligence may be used by the d to reduce damages

Question 33

consent

Answer 33

the c voluntary exposed themselves to a risk of harm