Paper 2 Tort Flashcards
What is the burden of proof
On the balance of probibilities
How is negligence defined
Blyth v Birmingham ‘failing to do something or doing something the reasonable person would not do’
What is duty of care?
Donogue v Stevenson Neighbour test Caparo v Dickman Harm forseseeable- Kent v Griffiths Proximity- Bourhill v Young, Mcloughlin Fair, just and reasonable Hill v Chief
Breach of duty
Bolam reasonable person, man on the clapham omnibus Maurice 1. Competent professional 2. Body of opinion Mullin- Age Nettleship- Learner Rick factors Special characteristics Paris v Stepney Size of risk Bourhill v Young, Haley Appropriate precautions Latimer Unknown Roe Public benefit Day
Damage
Causation But For Barnett v Chelsea
Intervening remoteness of damage Wagon Mound
Foreseeable- Hughs, Bradford
Egg Shell Rule Leech Brain
Res Ispa ‘the thing speaks for itself’
St Katharine Docks
C has to show D was in control and accident would not have occured if not for negligence
Defences- contributory negligence
Law Reform Act 1945
Sayers 25% way tried to escape
Jayes 100% took guard off
Defences- Consent volenti
Stermer- understood risk
Smith- voluntarily undertaken
Hayes- no consent public duty
Sidway- not all risks need to be explained medical
What is an occupier and premises
Wheat v Lacon can be more than one
Harris v Birkenhead Court decided council had control
Bailey v Armes control over means of access not sufficient to make defendants liable
Premises fixed or moveable structure Wheeler even a ladder premises
Lawful Visitor 1957
S2(1) common duty of care
Adult visitors 1957
s2(2) ‘reasonably safe in using the premises for purposes invited there’
Laverton CoA decided shop owners took reasonable precautions
Dean slipping an everyday occurrence and not foreseeable
Liability to children 1957
S2(3) ‘must be prepared for children to be less careful’
Glasgow council should be aware berries are alluring
Phipps council not liable because parents have a responsibility
Jolly v Sutton not necessary to foresee specific outcome
Liability to people carrying out trade 1957
S2(3)B ‘a person in exercise of their calling will appreciate ordinary risks’
Roles v Nathan occupier not liable where tradesman fails to guard against risks they are expected to know of
Haseldine work was given to a specialist hired must be competent Bottomley
Occupier must check work is done properly Woodward
Defences to claim under 57 Act
warning notices
Rae deep pit, warning notice alone not enough
Staples dangers of wet algae on high wall obvious, no warning notice necessary
Liability to trespassers 1984
traditionally no duty other than to not deliberately inflict injury Addie v Dumbreck
HoL Practice Statement introduce duty of ‘common humanity’ Herrington
When will the occupier owe a duty 1984
S3(1)
aware of danger and have reasonable grounds it exists
reasonable grounds to believe others in vicinity
risk is one where the occupier may reasonably be expected to offer protection
Cases involving adults 1984
Ratcliff occupier not required to warn of obvious dangers
Folkstone occupier no duty, did not expect trespasser to jump in the harbour at midnight
Foster despite danger, could not have anticipated a trespasser in the vicinity
Rhind occupier not liable if don’t know of danger
Cases involving children 1984
Coventry since child appreciated danger, no danger due to state of property
Baldacchinho injuries did not result from the state of the premises
Defences 1984
consent, contributory negligence
warning notice Westwood eventhough door should’ve been locked, warning notice sufficient
What is Private Nuisance?
a tort claim where use or enjoyment of property affected by unreasonable behaviour of a neighbour
What are the 2 main types of private nuisance?
loss of amenity nuisance and material damage nuisance
What does the claimant require in private nuisance?
interest in the land, unlawful interference, with the use or enjoyment, damage must be the type that is foreseeable
Who can bring an action in private nuisance?
a person with an interest in the land, owner or tenant, not family members Malone v Laskey. Hunter v Canary interference must be sufficient with no solution. Sedleigh Lord Wright ‘a balance has to be maintained between the right of an occupier to do what he likes with the land and the right of the neighbour to not be interfered’. can be liable where nuisance is a result of natural causes where aware and fails to deal with Leaky v National Trust, Anthony v Coal
Unlawful in private nuisance
unlawful if behaviour is unreasonable, doesn’t need to be illegal Sedleigh
Factor of reasonableness Locality
Sturges v Brigman ‘what would be a nuisance in Belgrave Square would not be so in Bermondsey’ Bamford v Turner cocks crowing in the morning more of a nuisance in a residential area
Factors of reasonableness Duration of interference
Crown v Kimbolton firework display lasting 20 minutes causing fire actionable nuisance despite being short term. De Keysers for entitlement to an action in negligence need not be permanent
Factors of reasonableness- Sensitivity of the claimant
Robinson if it can be shown claimant is particularly sensitive, action may not be nuisance
Factors of reasonableness- Malice
Hollywood deliberate, unreasonable acts are nuisance. Christie v Davie injunction granted against neighbour due to deliberate malicious behaviour as revenge