Breach of Duty Flashcards
(26 cards)
How many steps to establishing Breach of Duty?
Two Step Analysis
- Set the standard of care (question of law)
- Assess whether there was a breach of that standard (question of fact)
as per Goldman v Hargrave
Bolton v Stone
The standard must be of reasonable care, not perfect.
Wilsher v Essex
Reasonable care is what is considered generally objective by a reasonable person, foregoing the personal equation
Barrie v Cardiff
Each member of a team needs to meet the standard of care themselves, the team is not assessed as a collective
Bolam v Friern
A person practicing a particular skill or expertise is required to show the ‘the ordinary skill of an ordinary competent man exercising that particular art’.
Carmarthenshire CC v Lewis
Extremely young children do not owe a duty of care
Mansfield v Weetabix
If D was unaware of their disability which caused them to be negligent, they are not liable
Nettleship v Weston
In a non-professional context, standard of someone experienced is applied to everyone, even the inexperienced
Wilsher v Essex Rule
In professional context, standard of someone experienced is applied to everyone, even the inexperienced
Agony of the Moment Scenarios
Where D had to make a split-second decision under pressure, the expected standard of care is lowered i.e Cattley v St John’s Ambulance
Blyth v Birmingham Waterworks
Defines negligence as not doing something a reasonable person would do and vice versa
Bolton v Stone
Narrows the foreseeability test to the foreseeability of the accident at hand.
Cunningham and Bunker
Absence or previous occurrence of a particular risk may determine whether it was foreseeable.
Roe v Minister of Health
Negligence is not assessed with knowledge uncovered in the present - only view what knowledge was available to the defendant at the time.
Knightley v Johns
Where D took reasonable care but accident still happened, this may be called an inevitable accident and D is not liable. However, if the accident was avoidable had it not been for mistakes, D is liable
Bull v Devon AHA
System breach, different from VL, is a result of under-resourced and incompetent structure
Precautionary Steps
Answer the question of ‘what were the defendant’s acts and omissions? What steps could have been taken to prevent the injury to the claimant?’
These are the claimant’s breach allegations against the defendant. These are more difficult to allege in emergency scenarios.
Breach Test
Court will decide ‘should these things have been done by a reasonable defendant?’
Apply quadrant of breach factors from Bolton v Stone
- What was the probability of the injury occurring?
- What was the likely gravity of the injury, were it to occur?
- What would have been the cost to implement the precautionary steps?
- Would the social/economic utility of the defendant’s activity be severely compromised/reduced, if the precautionary steps were implemented?
S.1 Compensation Act and SARAH Act 2015
When defendant is offering a desirable activity
Bolam v Friern
Bolam Test: If a responsible body of professionals in that field would have done the same thing, then there is no negligence.
Bolitho v City and Hackney
Bolitho Gloss - Courts may ignore the opinion of the professional body if the opinion is illogical, unreasonable or does not withstand proper analysis
Cattley v St John’s Ambulance - Making it Worse Principle
Defendant who volunteered to help must take reasonable care - negligence on their part can be liable
Res Ipsa Loquitar
Exact cause of injury is unclear but everything points to the defendant being negligent. Scott v London requires
- Facts speak for themselves,
- D had exclusive control,
- No plausible non-negligent explanation
- Doesn’t usually happen without negligence
C v Burcombe
Where the defendant was aware of their disability which caused them to be negligent, they are liable
