Case Law

Question 1

L’Olympique Lyonnais v. Fuster (Hooligans harming spectators)

Answer 1

The organizer of a football match is under a duty of care to take adequate security measures. It must pay compensation in respect of injury suffered by spectators

Duty od care

Question 2

Snow-covered steps

Answer 2

The owner of a piece of land which is dedicated to public use must comply with the requirements to keep public security

Scope of protection

Question 3

Lettuce leaf

Answer 3

A shopkeeper’s failure to keep the floor clean and safe for customers amounts to a breach of safety obligation.

The customer should also be careful knowing that in a market, things are bound to be on the floor

Scope of protection

Question 4

Donoghue v. Stevenson
(Snail in the Bottle Case)

Answer 4

You must take reasonable care to avoid acts or omissions which you can reasonably foresee

Foreseeability Test

Duty of Care

Question 5

Smith v. Littlewoods Organisation

Answer 5

Court: no liability for pure omissions
BUT: Special circumstances are required, where the defendant negligently permits or created a source of danger

Duty of Care

Question 6

Caparo Industries v. Dickman

Answer 6

Duty of care to existing shareholders but not to prospective investors.

3 stage test to determine whether duty of care exists:
- Foreseeability
- Proximity (nearness)
- Imposing duty of care is just and reasonable

Question 7

White v. Jones

Answer 7

The court claimed that the beneficiaries (daughters) have a tort claim towards the solicitors.

The court upheld the solicitor’s liability for negligence (delaying the appointment)

Question 8

Garde des Sceaux v. Banque populaire

Answer 8

Even in the absence of fault on part of the state, administrative decisions may give rise to liability and to compensation when they have created a special risk

Question 9

Osman v. United Kingdom

Answer 9

UK Court of appeal. No liability, police can rely on immunity

ECtHR: violation of art 6 (right to fair trial)

Question 10

Bubbins v. United Kingdom (Intruder Boyfriend case)

Answer 10

Police has to announce when they are going to shoot and person has to show they re a threat to police

Police responsible for the death of the boyfriend?

No violation of article 2 (right to life), but violation of art 13 right to effective remedy

Question 11

Gaudras v Dangereux
(Claim by Concubine)

Answer 11

If the relationship between claimant and victim is stable and non-adulterous, the claimant is entitled to damages.
- Courts can try to limit the concept of damage by ensuring the damage is real/certain

Question 12

Destruction of Sperm

Answer 12

Body integrity is interpreted extensively to include the loss of sperm preservation, in order to give compensation for emotional distress.

Question 13

Power Cable

Answer 13

Direct victim= interference with the existence of the business (e.g. a targeted boycott)

This does NOT include interference with rights which can be severed from the business without difficulty (e.g. injury to an employee or damage to a power cable)

This interference affected the community as a whole

Question 14

Alcock Case

Answer 14

Reasonable foreseeability of psychiatric injury (PTSD)
1.Foreseeability
2. Proximity;
- Emotional proximity (not incld. sibling)
- Physical and temporal proximity
- Proximity of perception

Question 15

Spartan Steel Case

Answer 15

Law only provides restitution for deserving cases = they suffered physical damage

Physical damage= foreseeable and an equally direct consequences of the defendant’s negligence (machines damaged by negligence), meaning it does NOT include economic loss independent of the
physical damage

Question 16

Tarasoff V University of California

Answer 16

Mental professionals not only have a duty of confidentiality to patients but also a duty to protect an individual being threatened by a patient.

Question 17

Hachette Filipacchi v France (Corpse Pictures)

Answer 17

The magazine being forced to publish a statement saying that they published a photo without the consent of the Filipacchi family does not violate their freedom of expression, since it does not have a dissuasive effect on the press from publishing material.

Question 18

Howald Moore and Others v Switzerland

Answer 18

When it is scientifically proven that an individual could not know that he/she was suffering from a particular disease (caused by the product), this fact should be taken into account in calculating time limitation.

Question 19

Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball Co.

Answer 19

Ads = Offer

There was an acceptance by Mrs. Carlill (buying and using the product)

In this case, money had been deposited in a bank ‘showing sincerity in the matter’ (shows intent to enter into a legal agreement)

Question 20

Exploding Lemonade Bottle

Answer 20

Supermarket is liable once customer places a product in their basket

If the customer is injured by the goods before paying the customer has a claim for damages

Question 21

Bank Guarantee

Answer 21

To form a valid contract, it does not matter whether the party communicating an intention to be bound by a contract actually had the will to make, or was even conscious of making a declaration aimed at legal transaction

Question 22

Betting Syndicate

Answer 22

An agreement to place a bet each week does NOT create a legal obligation so that the person who had agreed to place it will be liable if the bet would have won.

Question 23

Shared Business Trip

Answer 23

Informal agreement (agreement to shared the costs is NOT sufficient to form a contract)

Question 24

Hannah Blumenthal

Answer 24

Requirements for a
contract of abandonment need to be fulfilled (consensus + intention that is reasonably understood)

Question 25

Shark Meat

Answer 25

Where the parties are agreed on a particular obligation but use the wrong word to describe it, their common intention will prevail

Question 26

The Threatened Wife

Answer 26

A threat is unlawful if it is not a fair way to achieve a valid goal or if the person making it knows or should know that it goes against moral standards.

Question 27

The Former Shop Director

Answer 27

A contract cannot be avoided on the ground of threat if the threat was not sufficiently serious to determine the threatened party’s consent

Question 28

The Rolf

Answer 28

The abuse by one party of the other party’s state of necessity, renders the agreement voidable on the ground of threat as the consent to enter into the agreement is not freely given

Question 29

Sherwood v. Walker (Cow Poem Case)

Answer 29

A contract can be rescinded if both parties are mistaken about a fundamental aspect of the agreement, such as the cow's ability to breed.

Question 30

Raffles v. Wichelhaus (Peerless)

Answer 30

ambiguity about the subject matter (both parties do not have a clear, mutual understanding of the terms) = there is no consensus, and the contract cannot be enforced.

Question 31

North Ocean Shipping Co Ltd v. Hyundai (Atlantic Baron)

Answer 31

If someone is pressured into agreeing to a contract change, the contract can be canceled. But if they go along with it and keep paying without complaining, the contract stands. In this case, NOS’s acceptance of the price increase made the contract valid.

Question 32

Hartog v Colin and Shields (Argentine Hare Skins)

Answer 32

If there is a clear mistake in the contract that one party should have known about, the contract can be canceled.

Question 33

The EDF Strike

Answer 33

A strike of a party’s own workforce is an internal event except when it affects the public as a whole

Question 34

The Bad Harvest

Answer 34

One cannot be required to do more than one can reasonably perform considering good faith and exceptional circumstances BUT for generic good it cannot be impossible, it is only impossible for specific good that cannot be replaced by another good of the same quantity/quality

Question 35

Surrogate Mother: France

Answer 35

Childless (infertile) wife of biological husband cannot adopt the child that has been bared by the surrogate (biological) mother, since it is against goof morals that a mother (surrogate) should carry a child just to abandon it

Question 36

Davis Contractor Ltd v. Fareham UDC

Answer 36

Performing the contract becomes more difficult (less profitable) for the contractor, but it is still possible to perform. - No grounds for frustration, since it might be foreseeable that construction takes longer than was expected (added costs are not unjust)

Question 37

Schroeder Music Publishing Co v. Macaulay

Answer 37

If contractual restrictions appear to be unnecessary or to be reasonably capable of enforcement in an oppressive manner, then they must be justified before they can be enforced.

Question 38

Ship not loaded

Answer 38

If one party's actions seriously harm the contract's purpose, the other party may be released from their obligations. The breach must be significant enough that continuing the contract is no longer reasonable. In such cases, a deadline for performance may not be necessary.

Question 39

Machine for peeling artichokes

Answer 39

A party who has failed to perform cannot be ordered to pay compensation for losses which were not envisaged (foreseeable), at the time the contract was made

Question 40

The bad-tempered bear

Answer 40

A debtor whose non-performance has caused injury to the creditor should be liable in full for her injuries unless he is exonerated on the ground of force majeure or unless he contributed to her injury through her own fault

Question 41

Hong Kong Fir Shipping Co Ltd v. Kawasaki

Answer 41

Delay = reason for termination only if delay amounts to a frustration of the contract (renders performance impossible) Does the delay deny the claimant the whole benefit of the contract? If no: No termination Instead: damages

Question 42

Hochster v. de la Tour

Answer 42

Anticipatory breach = absolved from any future performance of it + his right to sue for any damage he has suffered from the breach of it.

Question 43

Houghton v Trafalgar Insurance Co

Answer 43

Meaning of the exemption was ambiguous + interpretation against interest of insurer = insured company has to pay