Principles, Tests and mistakes Flashcards
what are the other types of claimants in a psychiatric harm situation?
- guilt ridden claimant
- AOR : stress at work
- Self-harm
- Rescuers
- communication of shocking news
- fear of the future
Foreseeability - proximity - policy
joint and severable liability
When two or more tortfeasors combine to create a loss (as in Fitzgerald), the Civil Liability (Contribution) Act 1978 provides in ss 1 and 2 that a person made liable in respect of any damage suffered by another person could recover a contribution from any other tortfeasor to the extent that the court finds just and equitable, taking into account each party’s blameworthiness.
Facts of Fitzgerald: The claimant was crossing the road and was struck by car 1 and then by car 2, causing the claimant to suffer a neck injury. It could not be determined which car was responsible/caused the damage because both incidents happened so soon after each other. Therfore Ds were jointly and severally liable
What does McBride think about the Supreme Court reasoning in TIndall?
‘To give rise to a duty of care, it would be sufficient that the activity of the
police as a whole created a danger, i.e. that the activity of the police as a whole created an
unreasonable and reasonably foreseeable risk of physical harm to the victim.’ But this gets
things twisted up the wrong way – one can only say that ‘their activity as a whole’ created ‘an
unreasonable and reasonably foreseeable risk of physical harm’ to Bird and Tindall if you
include in that activity their inaction after they saw Kendall off to hospital. But the police will
have owed a duty of care to Bird and Tindall (if they owed them a duty at all) before they failed
to do anything to clear up the danger posed by the black ice on the road. What generates the
police’s duty of care cannot include their inaction after seeing Kendall off because the police
are being sued for that inaction – it is that inaction that the claimants have to establish is
wrongful (= in breach of a duty of care, not establishing a duty of care) in order to sue the
police.
Are the actions under the Fatal Accidents Act 1976 susceptible to defences?
YES. (b) Action by dependants of deceased suing in their own names, but note that their action is derivative, so defences available against the deceased are available against the dependant’s claim
do doctors and social services owe a duty of care in investigationg abuse?
NO - JD v East Berkshire Community Health NHS Trus
