Unit A 4 Civil Law Flashcards

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

Tort

A

A ‘civil wrong’
Defamation, slander, trespass , negligence and BOSD Health and Safety related torts are negligence and BOSD Time limits apply – typically 3 years

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

Negligence

A

Failure to act as a reasonable man:
“Guided upon those considerations which ordinarily ‘regulate’ human conduct”
Failure to meet a Duty of Care:
Failure to avoid acts or omissions you can reasonably foresee are likely to injure your neighbour
Neighbour:
Persons who are so closely and directly affected by my acts that I ought to have them in my contemplation

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

Concept of ‘duty of care’

A

The ‘neighbour test‘-Donoghue v Stevenson The duty of care owed by:
Designers
Manufacturers and suppliers to customers /users Occupiers of premises to those visiting the premises Contractors to clients and vice versa
Extent of duty is bound by reasonableness and foreseeability Elevated duties to those who are vulnerable Paris v Stepney B.C. 1951-lost remaining eye!

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

Vicarious Liability

A

An employer may be held criminally or civilly liable for the acts or omissions of his employees
Even if they wilfully disobey instructions
Employees must be acting in the course of their employment
Master and servant
Rose v Plenty 1976 - milkman

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

The nature of an employers Duty of Care

A

To provide:
1. A safe place of work and safe access and egress 2.Safe systems of work
3. Safe plant, equipment and materials
4. Instruction, training and supervision
5. Competent fellow employees
Wilsons and Clyde coal v English 1938 -crushed by haulage plant

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

Main defences to claims of negligence

A
Denial
No duty owed
No breach of duty - not foreseeable, employer’s arrangements were reasonable
Breach did not lead to damage
Type of damage not foreseeable
Volenti nonfit injuria (has limited application)
Contributory negligence
Time expired (Limitations Act)
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

Contributory Negligence

A

Where an individual contributes to his own injury Damages awarded may be reduced
Balance of ‘blameworthines s ’
Used tomitigatelosses
Udder v Associated Portland Cement 1965-pigeon rescue

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

Liability and foresight

A

Claimant may have contributed to own ill health Foreseeability is based on ‘current knowledge’ Courts will need to establish ‘date of knowledge’ Implications for employers and insurers
Need to assess status of ‘emerging risks’

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

Employer’s Liability Insurance

A

Employers ’ Liability (Compulsory Insurance) Act 1969 Amendment Regulations 2008
Employers MUST insure against liability for injury or disease to employees
Some exemptions
Minimum sum insured is £5m, although most commonly £10m Employers must display certificates at each place of business Must keep at record of previous cover and insurances for 40 years

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

Employers ’ Liability (Defective Equipment) Act 1969

A

Allows employees to seek damages from employer due to injuries sustained while us ing defective equipment
Defect to be partly or wholly attributable to a third party
Allows for employer(insurer) to recover damages from e.g. manufacturer, supplier
An example of vicarious liability
Davie v NewMertonBoard Mills 1959 -damaged chisel causing injury

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

Breach of a Statutory Duty

A

BOSD is a tort
Negates the need to prove negligence
Used in civil actions unless statute forbids it (HASWA S.47) Usually only applies to secondary legislation
Some regulations are ‘excluded’ or statute barred

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

Breach of Statutory Duty - Claimant must prove?

A
He/s he was within class of person statute was intended to protect The risk was of the type the 
statute was intended to prevent
The defendant was in breach of duty
The breach caused the injury
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

Double-Barrelled Actions

A

Claimant may pursue a civil claim for negligence and breach of statutory duty at the same time
Higher chance of success
If one action fails the other may succeed If successful only one award for damages is made

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

The main defences to the tort (delict) of BOSD

A
Statute-barred - HSWA, MHSWR and the CDM Duty not on the defendant No breach of duty
Injured party not within the class of persons protected by the statute Harm not of the type that the statute was designed to prevent
No causal connection between the breach and the loss suffered
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

Factors to be considered in the assessment of damages

A

General damages - pain & suffering
Special damages - actual losses

Other damages
Calculated by case Previous cases and payments considered

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

General Damages

A

Usually termed’ pain, suffering and loss of amenity
Examples include:
Physical or emotional pain and suffering Loss of companionship
Disfigurement
Loss of reputation
Loss or impairment of mental or physical capacity
Loss of enjoyment of life, etc.
Not easily quantifiable
Depends on the individual circumstances of the claimant May consider future implications (speculative)

17
Q

Special Damages

A

Compensate for the quantifiable monetary losses (pecuniary)
Quantifiable and specific:
Costs
Repair or replacement of damaged property
Lost earnings (both historically and in the future)
Loss of irreplaceable items
Additional domestic cos ts , etc.
Includes amounts the claimant has already spent on medical treatment or support required to mitigate problems caused

18
Q

The concept of joint tortfeasors

A

Tortfeasor - wrongdoer
Joint and several liability
More than one person identified as the tortfeasor
Judger will decide who is liable
Balance of blameworthines s
Recovery of damages from joint tortfeasors is usually from a single insurer

19
Q

Personal Injury Action Protocol

A
Letter of claim:
Summary of facts
Details of loss
The reply:
Acknowledge within 24 hours
The investigation:
Defendant has max 30 days for EL claim & 40 days for PL claim to carry out investigations
Reply must then be sent - admission, denial, partial admission
20
Q

Occupiers Liability Acts 1957 & 1984

A

Statutory duty providing civil remedy only
1957-1984:
An occupier owes a ‘common duty of care’ to all lawful visitors
1984 on:
Extended to cover trespassers if:
Occupier is aware of a danger
Occupier knows trespassers may be gaining access
Occupier might reasonably be expected to do
something about the risk Discharging duty by giving warning is potentially limited? Herrington v BRB 1972-child through fence; breach in fence known about

21
Q

Decided cases (1)

A

Bradford v Robins on Rentals Ltd 1967
British Railways Board v Herrington 1971
Caparo Industries Plc v Dickman 1990 - three-fold test (harm must be reasonably foreseeable; relationship & proximity; fair, just &
reasonable)
CornvWeirs Glass (Hanley)Ltd1960
Davie v New Merton Board Mills Limited 1958 Donalds on v Hays
Distribution Services Ltd 2005 Donoghue v Stevens on 1932 Herrington v British Railways Board 1972

22
Q

Decided cases (2)

A

Latimer v A E C L t d 1 9 53
MerseyDocks &HarbourBoardvCoggins &Griffith(Liverpool)Ltd 1 946
Paris v Stepney Borough Council 1951
Rose v Plenty 1976
Sutherland v Hatton and others 2002
Thompson & others v Smiths Ship Repairers 1984
Wilsons and Clyde Coal Co v English 1938