Tort Law

Question 1

Spartan steel and alloys v Martin

Answer 1

Generally no duty of care is owed to avoid causing another to suffer a loss which is purely economic, where the finacial loss is not related to personal injury or damage to property

Question 2

Hedlybyrne v heller

Answer 2

When economic loss is caused by a negligent misstatement rather than a negligent act liability may be imposed

Question 3

Behrens and ors v Bertram mills

Answer 3

Is a long term diagnosed mental injury which is greater than shock or grief the claimant must be suffering from a diagnosed psychiatric injury

Question 4

Hinz v berry

Answer 4

Grief sorrow fear panic and terror do not amount to psychiatric injury

Question 5

Revill v newberry

Answer 5

Contributory negligence- is a partial defence that means that the courts can apportion loss between the parties making a fairer outcome than a complete defence

Question 6

Gough v thorns

Answer 6

Burden of proof is on the defendant to demonstrate the following : the claimant failed to take proper care in the circumstances for their own safety, lack of proper care for own safety is not the same as breach of duty of care

Question 7

Froom v butcher

Answer 7

Failure to wear a seatbelt

Question 8

O’Connell v Jackson

Answer 8

Failure to wear a helmet on motor cycle

Question 9

Capps v miller

Answer 9

Failure to fasten on a motorcycle

Question 10

Davies v swan motor co

Answer 10

Exposing oneself to danger by inappropriate use of vehicle

Question 11

Reeves v commissioner of police

Answer 11

Suicide

Question 12

Stapley v gypsum mines

Answer 12

Failure to follow safety instructions

Question 13

Rylands v fletcher

Answer 13

Form of strict liability defendant may be liable without being negligent

Question 14

Hunter v Canary Wharf

Answer 14

In order to bring a claim of nuisance a claimant must have interest in the land which they claim their enjoyment or use of had been unreasonably interfered with

Question 15

London borough of Southwark v mills

Answer 15

Unlawful interference- this means an unreasonable use of land by the defendant which leads to an unreasonable interference with the claimants use of enjoyment of their own land

Question 16

Donoghue v Folkestone properties

Answer 16

The occupier is aware of a danger or has reasonable grounds that it exists

Question 17

Ratcliff v McConnell

Answer 17

Breach of duty - the standard of care is objective so if not met will amount to a breach. Duty is to take care as is reasonable in all circumstances

Question 18

Tomlinson v congleton

Answer 18

Warning and warning signs - the duty may be discharged by giving a warning or discouraging others from taking the risk

Question 19

White lion hotel v James

Answer 19

Breach of duty of care - the standard of care is of the reasonable occupier

Question 20

Barnet v Chelsea hospital

Answer 20

By the breach - would not happened but for the breach

Question 21

Hughes v Lord advocate

Answer 21

However the precise chain of events need not be foreseeable

Question 22

The wagon mound

Answer 22

Not too remote from the breach - of a foreseeable type

Question 23

Smith v leech brain

Answer 23

Nor is it necessary for the extent of the damage to be foreseeable this id the thin skull test being used in negligence

Question 24

Montegomery v Lanarkshire

Answer 24

Although this is an objective test an appropriate degree of knowledge may be added to the reasonable person. So a professional will be judged not by the standard of a reasonable person but by the standard of a reasonable professional

Question 25

Nettleship v Weston

Answer 25

Duty of care does not apply to trainees in any skill for example a learner driver will be judged by the standard of a reasonable driver

Question 26

Mullin v richards

Answer 26

A child will be judged by the standard of a reasonable child

Question 27

Bolton v stone

Answer 27

Degree of risk involved the greater the risk the more precautions a defendant will have to take in order for their actions to be judged as acting at the standard of a reasonable person

Question 28

Latimer v aec

Answer 28

Cost of precautions - the court will not expect the the cost of precautions to outweigh the risk involved

Question 29

Paris v Stepney borough council

Answer 29

Potential seriousness of injury - the more serious the potential injury the greater the level of care required in order to be judged as acting at the standard of a reasonable person

Question 30

Watt v Hertfordshire county council

Answer 30

Importance of activity - some risk may be acceptable if the risk undertaken is socially expectable

Question 31

Donoghue v Stevenson

Answer 31

Neighbour principle - you must take reasonable care to avoid acts of omissions you can reasonably foresee are likely to injure your neighbour

Question 32

Caparo v dickman

Answer 32

The damage must be reasonably foreseeable there must be a relationship of proximity between the parties it must be fair just and reasonable to impose a duty of care