Breaches Flashcards
(11 cards)
How is a breach established?
Established when D doesnt take such care to avoid imposing a duty of care. D must be under a duty of care, otherwise there isnt anything to breach.
Causation stems from whether the harm suffered by C, is attributable to the actions/omission of D.
Essentially D is in breach when their actions are below the standard imposed by the law, be it statute or common law.
What does the case of Cole establish in terms of breaches?
Cole establishes that “pure accidents” exist, and in pure accidents the C cannot claim damages because there is no one to place “fault” on.
How does the court establish whether the conduct falls under what is required by the standard of the law.
- How D ought to have behaved in the circumstance. And what required standard exists that would influence how they should have behaved.
- Takes into consideration how D did behave.
In short, a combination as to how D should have behaved, and how D did behave.
What is the basic test?
The basic test probes two questions.
The objective test and the reasonable test.
Reasonable test = Did D behave reasonably given the circumstance?
Objective test = Would a reasonable person have acted differently in the same situation?.
What case pertained to road users/learner drivers? And was defendant held liable?
Case of Nettleship
-C offered D driving lessons, the car had mounted and as a result C’s kneecaps were broken.
The court held that D was liable because the same duty of care imposed on drivers, was also imposed on learner drivers.
When establishing breach, there is a standard of care that is addressed in order for breach to be established.
What four components must be addressed?
- Likelihood/probability of injury
- Seriousness of injury
3.The cost of taking precaution - The social value of the activity.
The likelihood of injury was established in what case? And what did the case pertain to?
-Established in Bolton
-C claimed actionable negligence was incurred after cricket ball had hit her after being hit out of ground.
-Court held that a reasonable person wouldn’t take precautions to avoid this, because it was rare. Thus the ground wasn’t held liable for this because the chances of it occurring were so low.
The seriousness of injury and the case it relates to.
Seriousness of Injury relates to case of Paris
- C suffered serious injury when a metal chip had flown into one of his eyes, leaving him completely blind as his other eye was blind too.
-C sued employer for not providing them with safety goggles.
-D had been found negligent as although chances of injury was low, it was a serious injury and the provision of safety goggles was obviously necessary when a one eyed man had been put to work.
What case was cost of precautions established in?
-C suffered loss as a result of factory flooding from rainfall and mixing with oily liquid. When water was drained away floor had become slippery and C slipped and broke ankle
-D held not liable as employer had done what was necessary of them by having drains. And extra precautions would be inconvenient and costly.
What case establishes social value of activity?
Watt - It claims that the greater the social value of an activity, the more likely courts will find it reasonable to have it dispensed with safety precautions.
What case establishes a test for medical negligence?
Bolam and Bolitho. - Worth noting Bolam takes into consideration that medical experts do not have to be the best in their field, they can be average just not subpar.
Bolam - Do medical bodies agree with the action, as in, is it practice accepted as proper, if yes then its logical?
Bolitho was then added to extend test
Bolitho - Is the bodies actions reasonable and defendable?
