Statutes and Delictual Liability

Question 1

2 key statutes?

Answer 1

• Consumer Protection Act 1987

- Occupiers’ Liability (S) Act 1960

Question 2

What is the strict liability essence of the CPA 1987? Who can it apply to?

Answer 2

If a defect has caused harm, defender will be liable.

• producer, trademark user, supplier (occasionally)

Question 3

A v National Blood Authority.

Answer 3

• contaminated blood transfusions - Hep B
• no defence of state of scientific knowledge
• reasonable consumer would expect that when receiving blood, it would be safe
• NBA were liable

Question 4

Richardson v LRC Products Ltd

Answer 4

• unreasonable for consumer to expect 100% effectiveness of condom
• good (condom) did not fall below expected standard
• no liability

Question 5

Tesco v Pollard

Answer 5

• consumer expectations couldn’t be determined by technical details of safety standards as these were not in public domain
• good (detergent) did meet relevant safety standards under Act
• action failed

Question 6

Worsley v Tambrands Ltd

Answer 6

• TSS - argued product and instructions were inadequate
• the product was not unsafe or defective in terms of the Act
• no liability

Question 7

How must damage be caused for liability to arise?

Answer 7

s2(3) 1987 Act.
“caused wholly or partly by a defect in a product”

• direct causal link between defect and ultimate damage

Question 8

Defences to product liability?

Answer 8

• UK statutory or EC regulations
• defender did not supply product
• goods not supplied in course of business
• defective did not exist at relevant time
• scientific/technical knowledge

Question 9

McDyer v Celtic FC

Answer 9

• injured by falling object in stadium

- res ipsa loquitur doctrine successfully argued and applied

Question 10

res ipsa loquitur

Answer 10

Mere occurences of some types of accident is sufficient to imply negligence.

Question 11

Telfer v Glasgow Corporation

Answer 11

• Held that Co-op still had authority at time of sale

- deemed occupiers as they still had keys and control over security of premises

Question 12

Haggarty v Glasgow Corporation

Answer 12

• lease made Glasgow Corp liable for repairs so they were liable for any injuries under the Act

Question 13

Extent of standard of care expected of occupier?

Answer 13

No absolute strict liability.

• reasonable standard

Question 14

Tomlinson v Congleton Borough Council

Answer 14

• adult diving in lake despite swimming prohibition
• no liability
• claimant chose to engage in dangerous activity

Question 15

Bermingham v Sher Brothers

Answer 15

• seven firemen killed
• OL duty extends to firefirefighters
• not expected to forsee how a fire woulde develop/be fought

Question 16

McGlone v British Railways Board

Answer 16

• duty for trespassing? 12 year old ignored warning signs
• O duty not to ensure the entrant’s safety but only to show reasonable care
• no failure of duty as O

Question 17

Titchener v British Railways Board

Answer 17

• O not requried to prevent damage of an obvious risk
• she admitted dangers of her actions - crossing railway
• volenti non fit iniuria could apply

Question 18

Relevant statute for safety of workplace?

Answer 18

Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974

Question 19

Kennedy v Cordia

Answer 19

• claimant successful in