Tort - Negligence Cases Flashcards

You may prefer our related Brainscape-certified flashcards:
1
Q

Caparo v Dickman

A

3 part test

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

Robinson v CCWY

A

Not novel case so test not used

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

Kent v Griffiths

A

Foreseeability/ambulance staff and patients

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

Mullin v Richard’s

A

Children & other children

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

Bolam v Friem Hospital

A

Doctors & patients

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

Nettleship v Weston

A

Drivers an other road users (including passengers in vehicle)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

Watt v Herts CC

A

Firemen & colleagues

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

Hall v Simons

A

Lawyers and clients

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

Palmer v Cornwall County Council

A

Teachers and pupils

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

Sayers v Harlow VDC

A

Local authorities and public

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

Donoghhue v Stevenson

A

Neighbour principle
Manufacturers and customers

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

Robinson v CCWY

A

Police officers and public

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

Wagonmound

A

Transportation companies and other companies

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

Haley v London Electricity Board

A

Workmen and public

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

Paris v Stepney BC

A

Employers and Employees

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

Miller v Jackson

A

Property owners and their neighbours

17
Q

Smith v Smith

A

Hairdresser and clients

18
Q

Blyth v BWW

A

Reasonable man test

19
Q

Bolam v FH

A

D is a professional
Standard is of reasonable competent professional

20
Q

Mullins v Richard’s

A

D is child
Standard of reasonable child of that age

21
Q

Wells v Cooper

A

DIY skills
Standard of reasonable amateur (not professional)

22
Q

Nettleship v Weston

A

Not taken into account inexperience/trainee

23
Q

Bolton v Stone

A

Likelihood of harm

24
Q

Paris v Stepney

A

Seriousness of potential harm (vulnerability?)

25
Q

Latimer v AEC

A

Reasonable precautions

26
Q

Watt v Herts CC

A

Social benefits

27
Q

Barnett v C+K hospital

A

Causation “but for” test

28
Q

Wagonmound

A

Not too remote/reasonably foreseeable

29
Q

Bradford

A

D only needs to foresee general type of damage, not exact damage

30
Q

Hughs v Lord Advocate

A

D not need to foresee exactly how damage happened, just it could

31
Q

Smith v Leach Brain & co

A

Thin skull rule
D still liable