Torts - Negligence Flashcards
Donoghue v. Stevenson
Ginger beer bottle case
Barnett v. Packer & Co.
Sweet shop - buyer placing sweets - tiny iron particle pricked him and caused a bacterial infection - person wanted remedy - D said that the sweets were not procured from manufacturer directly so the iron particle could’ve settled anywhere - Court held that there was a general duty of care against anyone who purchased his products
Austin v. Great Western Railways
Lady didn’t purchase half ticket for her 3 year old child - train collided - Railways refused to give the claim for her child as a ticket was not purchased for the said passenger - Court held that irrespective of whether a ticket was purchased or not, the railways has a duty of care against anyone travelling in the train
Rural Transport Service v. Bezlum Bibi
-
Muir v. Glasgow Corp.
Children on a picnic - rain - manager of factory allowed them to use their tea room for shelter - a worker from tuck shop was taking tea - one child bumped into him - tea fell on child’s head - parents sue and claim compensation - Court held - duty of care only for foreseeable events and this was not foreseeable
Fardon v. Harcourt
Obedient dog - suddenly got violent and broke car’s windows - not negligent because such an act is not foreseeable
Palsgraf v. Long Island Railroad Company
Person standing near coach door - guard pushes him back into the train - explosives flew and injured a man standing near the next door - damages claimed - court held no relationship between guard and the person at the other gate - consequence was too far-fetched - Injury caused in the exercise of his duty and the injury was caused to the third person
Latimer v. AEC Ltd.
oil spill - saw dust spread to absorb the oil - one patch of oil left open - person slips on it - factory was not held liable because they took all necessary measures and even put up a warning sign
Smt. Shivkar v. Ram Naresh
Kids picnic near a lake and waterfall - teachers on duty took a break - one kid falls in lake and dies - court held that the kids were left unattended and teachers had an enhanced duty because of the location of the picnic - injury proximate to the act of the teachers
