Public Bodies

Question 1

Mersey Docks and Harbour Board Trustees v Gibbs [1866]

Answer 1

Prior to this case, a public body could not be sued at all in negligence. This case showed that where a public body had negligently carried out its duties, there was the potential for them to be found liable and attract damages.

Question 2

D v East Berkshire Community NHS Trust and other cases [2005]

Answer 2

Due to the Human Rights Act, a local authority owes a duty of care to a child in respect of its decision to take that child into care.
This duty is only for the child, and does not extend to the parents or family.

Question 3

Merthyr Tydfil County Borough Council v C [2010]

Answer 3

Distinguished the rule from ‘Berkshire’ stating that it is not the case that the duty of care does not extend to parents. However, no duty will be owed to those suspected of abuse.

Question 4

CN and another v Poole Borough Council [2016]

Answer 4

confirmed the stance that a local authority owes a duty of care to protect children in its area from harm.

Question 5

Van Colle v Chief Constable of Hertfordshire Constabulary [2008]

Answer 5

Although this particular claim failed - Claimants can explore Article 2 ECHR as a separate cause of action against public bodies

Question 6

Michael v Chief Constable of South Wales Police [2015]

Answer 6

A duty might exist where the police have assumed responsibility to a 999 caller

Question 7

DSD v The Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis [2014]

Answer 7

Allegations under Article 3 give rise to a duty to properly conduct an official investigation, and this duty can arise where crimes are committed by private individuals.

Question 8

Hill v Chief Constable of West Yorkshire [1989]

Answer 8

The police do not generally owe a duty carry out their functions with care (many policy reasons)

Question 9

Osman v Ferguson [1993]

Answer 9

Historically such claims against the police would simply be struck out

Question 10

Osman v United Kingdom (23452/94) (2000)

Answer 10

The ECHR challenged the UK’s procedure on ‘strike out’ in these cases.

Question 11

Z and others v UK and TP and KM v UK (App No 29392/95) (2002)

Answer 11

The ECtHR backtrack on strike out…but the Osman legacy lives on

Question 12

Capital and Counties Plc v Hampshire CC [1997]

Answer 12

The court held that the emergency services do owe a duty (once they have responded) not to positively make the situation worse.

Question 13

Kent v Griffiths [2001]

Answer 13

The ambulance service owe a duty once a call is accepted

Question 14

Robinson v Chief Constable of West Yorkshire Police [2018]

Answer 14

A duty is owed when the police, by direct and positive negligent action, cause property damage or personal injury.

Question 15

Rigby v Chief Constable of Northampton [1985]

Answer 15

shows that distinctions will be drawn between policy and operational matters.

Question 16

Rigby v Chief Constable of Northampton [1985

Answer 16

shows that distinctions will be drawn between policy and operational matters. (flammable gas - police)

Question 17

Brooks v Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis [2005].

Answer 17

The police do not owe a duty to treat witness’ of crime with respect.

Question 18

Smith v Chief Constable of Sussex Police [2008]

Answer 18

The police do not generally owe a duty carry out their functions with care (many policy reasons)

Question 19

Swinney v Chief Constable of Northumbria Police [1997]

Answer 19

A duty may be owed by the police where they assume responsibility.

Question 20

Swinney v Chief Constable of Northumbria Police [1997]

Answer 20

A duty may be owed by the police where they assume responsibility.

Question 21

Barrett v Ministry of Defence [1995]

Answer 21

The armed forces only owe a duty to an individual if there is an assumption of responsibility

Question 22

Jebson v Ministry of Defence [2000]

Answer 22

the defendants owed a duty to provide suitable transport and provisions for soldiers after a night out.

Question 23

Mulcahy v Ministry of Defence [1996]

Answer 23

The army does not owe a duty to soldiers in battle conditions. The duty only extends to civilian circumstances.

Question 24

Smith and others v Ministry of Defence [2013]

Answer 24

Limited combat immunity may be available for the MOD, but this should not be extended to planning and preparation activities

Question 25

OLL Ltd v Secretary of State for Transport [1997]

Answer 25

like the fire service, the coastguard owes no duty to respond to calls from people in trouble at sea; only a duty not to make the situation worse when they do.

Question 26

Knightly v Johns [1982]

Answer 26

a police operational error (as opposed to a policy one) may give rise to a duty