Negligence

Question 1

What case is negligence defined by?

Answer 1

Blyth

Question 2

Defined in Blyth ‘…’

Answer 2

‘failing to do something the reasonable person would do, or doing something they would not do’

Question 3

D has

Answer 3

D has fallen below standard

Question 4

Different types of standard
1.
2.
3.

Answer 4

1. Professional standard. A doctor will be compared to an ordinary reasonable doctor
2. Learners standard. Held to the standard of competent, experienced person
3. Children + young persons. Held to the standard of their age.

Question 5

What test is applied?

Answer 5

3 Part Caparo Test. D owes a duty of care

Question 6

Parts of the test include…

1.

Answer 6

1. Damage/injury is reasonably foreseeable

Question 7

Parts of the test include…

2.

Answer 7

2. Proximate relationship.Meaning D should have c in contemplation

Question 8

Parts of the test include…

3.

Answer 8

It must be reasonable and just to impose a duty of care onto D

Question 9

Montgomery

Answer 9

C had complications when giving birth. It meant that her child was born with cerebral palsy. A normal doctor would have warned of this risk. D did not and therefore fell below the standard of their profession.

Question 10

Mullin

Answer 10

2 school girls play fighting with rulers. Ruler snapped and blinded c. Held that D should be held to the standard of a 15 year old school girl and not an adult, therefore not negligent

Question 11

Nettleship

Answer 11

Learner crashed while in driving lesson. Instructor was injured. D was held liable as they are compared to competent driver

Question 12

Donaghue

Answer 12

Decomposing snail in drink. The company should have anyone who is directly or closely affected in contemplation

Question 13

Test to determine the duty has been breached

Answer 13

Blyth Test

Question 14

-

Answer 14

• Breach has caused damage, that isn’t too remote, meaning it needs to be closely related or as a result of negligence.
• Risk factors
  ie. ..
  - Special characteristics
  - High or low risk
  - Ease of avoidance

Question 15

WagonMound

Answer 15

Boat spilled oil into the harbour. Damage from Oil was reasonably foreseeable. BUT the fire at welding site was NOT reasonably foreseeable. Meaning the damage was too remote.

Question 16

Risk factors

Answer 16

• Special Characteristics
• High or low risk
• Cost or ease of avoidance

Question 17

Factual causation

Answer 17

‘But for test’

Question 18

Barnett

Answer 18

Cs husband went into A&E only to be turned away by doctors. Cs husband was poisoned with arsenic and would have died anyway. Therefore the doctor was not negligent.

Question 19

Legal causation

Answer 19

Any intervening acts. Egg-shell rule

Question 20

Defences =

Answer 20

Contributory Negligence, Volenti/consent

Question 21

Remedies =

Answer 21

Compensation

Question 22

State The Law

Answer 22

Defined in Blyth ‘Failing to do something the reasonable person would, or doing something they would NOT do.
D has fallen below standard.
Of a professional, Montgomery
A child is judged on their age, Mullin
A learner is compared to the experienced, Nettle ship
3 Part Caparo Test where D owes a duty of care
1. Damage/Injury is reasonable foreseeable
2. Proximate relationship. Should D have c in contemplation, Donoghue
3. Must be reasonable, and just to impose a duty of care
Blyth Test Where the duty has been breached
- Breach caused damage, that isn’t remote Wagonmound
- Risk factors, Special characteristics, High or low risk, ease of avoidance
Factual causation = ‘But for test’ Barnett
Legal causation = Intervening acts, egg shell rule

Defences = Contributory neg, Volenti/consent
Remedies = Compensation