Like this study set? Create a free account to save it.

Sign up for an account

Already have a Quizlet account? .

Create an account

Jennifer Looby

"The elements of Negligence" : Define Negligence.

A breach of legal duty to take care which results in damage to the claimant. -Rogers, W.V.H.(2002)

"The elements of Negligence" :Name the 4 Components of Negligence.

1.) The Claimant was owed a duty of care
2.) There was a breach of that duty of care.
3.) The claimant suffered damage as a result of that breach ( Causation)
4.) The damage suffered was not too Remote.

"The legal duty of care": What is the legal duty of care?

The relationship between def & Claimant, where the def has an obligation to take proper care to avoid causing injury to claimant.

"The elements of Negligence" : Caparo Industries Plc v. Dickman (1990) HL

Concerning: Duty of Care

Legal Principle: 3 points court must consider to establish duty of care:
1.Reasonable foresight of harm
2. Sufficient proximity of relationship
3. That it is fair , just, & reasonable to impose a duty

"The Neighbour Principle": was formulated in what case & by who?

Formulated by Lord Atkin in Donoghue v. Stevenson (1932) HL.

"Established Duty Situations": Name 5 established duty situations.

1.Employer to employee
2.Consumer to manufacturer- Donoghue v. Stevenson (1932) HL
3. Doctor to Patient
4. One road User to another
5. Solicitor to Client - Moy v. Pettman Smith (a firm)(2005)

"Liability for failing to act- Exceptions": Name four exceptions for failing to act.

1.) Prison Officers & Prisoners-
Home Office v.Dorset Yacht Co Ltd. (1970) AC (HL)

2.)Employer to Employee-
Hudson v. Ridge Manufacturing Co. (1957) QB

3.) Occupier & Visitor-
Occupiers Liability Act

4.) Parent & Child
-Carmarthenshire County Council v.Lewis (1955) AC (HL)

"Liability for failing to act- Exceptions": What is a liability for failing to act?

A duty to act positively if special relationship or relationships or control between parties.

"Special Protection": What is special protection?

Protects certain defendants from liability in negligence.

"Special Protection- Unborn Child": What is the key case in this area?

Burton v. Islington Health Authority (1993)
- Duty of care owed to unborn child which becomes actionable at birth

"Special Protection- Unborn Child": is only applicable to persons born prior to?

22 July 1976- when the Congenital Disabilities (Civil Liability) Act 1976 came into force.

"Special Protection- Unborn Child": What is the Congenital Disabilities (Civil Liability) Act 1976 ?

-Gives a right of action to a child who is born alive & disabled from a disability which affected the mother during pregnancy.

- extends to preconception tort, where the mother is harmed prior to concieving & the harm suffered affects the health of the baby at birth.

"Special Protection- Police": is there a general duty owed by the police?

No general duty of care owed by the police.

HillV. Chief Constable of West Yoskshire (1989)-
duty of police is to the public not individual.

"Special Protection-Fire Service": is there a general duty owed by the fire service?

Capital and Counties Plc v. Hampshire County Council (1997)-duty to public not individual

"Special Protection-Coast Guard": is there a general duty owed by the coast guard?

OLL Ltd v. Secretary of State for Transport (1997)
-duty to public not individual

"Special Protection-ambulance services": is there a general duty owed by the ambulance services?

Kent v.Griffiths, Roberts and London Ambulance Service (1999)
no general duty to respond to a call

"Special Protection-public authorites":is there a general duty owed by thepublic authories?

X (Minors) v. Bedfordshire County Council (1995)
-action would fail if carrying out delegated power

D.V.Bury Metropolitan Borough Council (2006)

"Breach of Duty":Breach of duty establishes what?

whether the defendant is breach of that duty.

"Standard of Care": Was defined in what case?

Blyth v. Birmingham Waterworks (1856)

"Standard of Care- the reasonable person": the cconduct will be measured against what?

Conduct of the defendant will be measured against that of a reasonable man.

Hall v. Brooklands Auto-Racing Club (1933) (CA)
-described persona as "the man in the street".

-applies objective test-

"Special Standards of Care": define.

situations where courts apply a different standard of care from that of a reasonable person

"Skilled or professional defendants":

Bolam v. Friern Hospital Management Committee (1957)

standard= reasonable person w/same skill or expertise.

Approved in Sideaway v.Bethlem Royal & Maudsey Hospital Governors (1985).

"Skilled or professional defendants": House of Lords clarified the situation in the Bolam Test in what case?

Bolitho v. City & Hackney Health Authority (1998)

"Unskilled Defendants": what allowance is made for unskilled defendants?

No allowance is made for the inexperience.

Nettleship v.Weston (1972)- unexperience driver

Wilsher v.Essex Area Health Authoirty (1987)- Junior Doctors


Mullin v. Richards (1998)- standard of care of same age

Gorley v. Codd (1967)-older children judged against standand of adult

"Sporting Event":

Woolridge v. Sumner(1963)-Owed a lower standard of care than general standard.

Harrison v.Vincent (1982)- test extended to fellow competitors

Smoldon v. Whitworth and Nolan (1997)- referees owe a duty of care to participants

Magnitude of Risk-Likelihood of Injury": risk is determined by the likelihood of it occuring & the seriousness of the potential injury

Bolton v. Stone (1951)
Miller v. Jackson (1977)

Haley v.London Electricity Board (1965)

Magnitude of Risk- Seriousness of inury": Def knows that aspecific individual is at risk of suffering.

Paris v.Stepney Borough COuncil (1951)

"Cost & Practicability of precautions": measures that the def could have taken to avoid the risk of injury

Latimer v.AEC Ltd(1953)

"Social Value":Def's behavious is in the public interest

Daborn v.Bath Tramways Motor Co Ltd. (1946)

"What would have a reasonable person have forseen?":

Harris v. Perry (2009)

"Proving Breach of Duty":established on the balance of probabilites.Claimant must prove.


"Proving Breach of duty- Res Ispa loquitor(the thing speaks for itself)":

Scott v. London & St. Katherine Docks Co (1865)

"Proving Breach of duty- Res Ispa loquitor(the thing speaks for itself)-Control": must be within the control of defendant

Easson v. LNER (1944)

"Proving Breach of duty- Res Ispa loquitor(the thing speaks for itself)-Case unknown": facts do not speak for themselves

Barkway v.. South Wales Transport (1950)

"Proving Breach of duty-Civil evidence Act 1968" - Section 11

if def has been convicted of s criminal offence- taken as proff that the def did not commit it in any associated civil proceedings unless contrary proved.

Please allow access to your computer’s microphone to use Voice Recording.

Having trouble? Click here for help.

We can’t access your microphone!

Click the icon above to update your browser permissions and try again


Reload the page to try again!


Press Cmd-0 to reset your zoom

Press Ctrl-0 to reset your zoom

It looks like your browser might be zoomed in or out. Your browser needs to be zoomed to a normal size to record audio.

Please upgrade Flash or install Chrome
to use Voice Recording.

For more help, see our troubleshooting page.

Your microphone is muted

For help fixing this issue, see this FAQ.

Star this term

You can study starred terms together

Voice Recording