contract law Flashcards

Question

Hadley v Baxendale (1854)

Answer 1

Context: A crankshaft delivery was delayed, causing the mill to shut down and incur heavy losses. Question Raised: Are damages recoverable for all losses resulting from a breach? General Rule: No. Damages are limited to foreseeable losses arising naturally or within the parties’ contemplation. The Achilleas (Transfield Shipping Inc v Mercator Shipping Inc) [2008] Context: A ship returned late, leading to reduced future charter rates for the owner. Question Raised: Are damages determined solely by foreseeability or by industry practice? General Rule: Industry norms may limit liability, even if loss was foreseeable, where a party did not assume responsibility for that loss.

Answer 2

Context: A former British spy published a book revealing government secrets, profiting from the breach of contract. Question Raised: Can a court order disgorgement of profits for breach of contract? General Rule: In exceptional cases, courts may award restitutionary damages (account of profits) to prevent unjust enrichment from a breach. 15. Sky Petroleum Ltd v V.I.P. Petroleum Ltd [1974] Context: A fuel supplier attempted to terminate a long-term contract with a buyer during a period of fuel scarcity. Question Raised: Can a court order specific performance for a contract involving goods? General Rule: Yes, in exceptional cases. Normally, damages are the remedy for breach of contract, but specific performance may be ordered if damages are inadequate (e.g., when goods are scarce). Case Fiches – Negligence (Duty of Care & Breach)

Answer 3

Context: The defendant water company installed pipes that, due to an unexpected severe frost, burst and caused damage to the claimant’s property. Question Raised: What is the standard definition of negligence? General Rule: Negligence is the failure to do something a reasonable person would do, or doing something a prudent person would not.

Answer 4

Context: A woman suffered illness after drinking ginger beer containing a decomposed snail. She sued the manufacturer despite having no contract with them. Question Raised: Can a manufacturer owe a duty of care to consumers with whom they have no direct contract? General Rule: Yes. The “neighbour principle” establishes that a duty exists where harm to others is reasonably foreseeable.

Answer 5

Context: A block of flats suffered structural damage due to inadequate foundations. The local council failed to inspect the construction properly. Question Raised: Can public authorities be held liable for negligence in regulatory inspections? General Rule: Yes. There is a duty of care if harm is foreseeable and there are no policy reasons to exclude liability.

Answer 6

Context: A company relied on audited accounts to invest but suffered losses. The auditors were sued for negligence. Question Raised: Does an auditor owe a duty of care to investors who rely on published financial statements? General Rule: No. The three-stage test (foreseeability, proximity, and fairness) determines duty; auditors owe duties only to intended recipients of reports.

Answer 7

Context: A patient received incorrect information from hospital reception staff about waiting times, leading to delayed treatment and permanent injury. Question Raised: Do non-medical staff owe a duty of care to patients? General Rule: Yes. All NHS staff are responsible for patient safety, including administrative personnel.

Answer 8

Context: A blind man fell into an excavation site left inadequately marked. He sued the utility company for negligence. Question Raised: Must precautions account for people with disabilities? General Rule: Yes. The defendant must anticipate risks to all potential users, including those with disabilities.

Answer 9

Context: A pregnant woman suffered a miscarriage after witnessing a motorcycle accident caused by the defendant’s negligence. Question Raised: Can a duty of care extend to people indirectly affected by an incident? General Rule: No. There must be sufficient proximity between the defendant and the claimant.

Answer 10

Context: A council failed to remove a hazardous obstruction at a road junction, which contributed to an accident. Question Raised: Can a public body be held liable for failing to act? General Rule: Generally, no. Liability for omissions arises only where a duty has been assumed.

Answer 11

Context: Vandals repeatedly started fires in an abandoned cinema, eventually causing damage to neighbouring properties. Question Raised: Can a property owner be liable for third-party actions on their land? General Rule: Usually no, unless they created or failed to mitigate the danger.

Answer 12

Context: A child escaped from school grounds and caused a driver to swerve and crash. Question Raised: Can an institution be responsible for third-party actions? General Rule: Yes. When responsibility is assumed over third parties (e.g., children), a duty of care exists.

Answer 13

Context: A decorator left a house unlocked, allowing a burglar to steal valuables. Question Raised: Can a contractor be liable for third-party crimes? General Rule: Yes. If a contractor creates a foreseeable risk, they owe a duty to prevent harm. X (Minors) v Bedfordshire County Council [1995] Context: Children suffered harm due to a local authority’s failure to intervene in an abusive home. Question Raised: Do local authorities owe a duty of care to protect children from abuse? General Rule: Generally, no. public policy considerations often limit liability.

Answer 14

Context: A pedestrian was injured in a police arrest operation. Question Raised: Do police officers owe a duty of care during operational activities? General Rule: Yes. Police are liable for foreseeable harm caused by positive acts, but not for general crime prevention failures.

Answer 15

Context: The mother of a murder victim sued the police for failing to catch the serial killer sooner. Question Raised: Do police owe a duty of care in criminal investigations? General Rule: No. There is no general duty to prevent crime or protect individuals from criminals. 15. Bolam v Friern Hospital Management Committee [1957] Context: A patient suffered injuries due to electroconvulsive therapy. The hospital argued it followed standard medical practice. Question Raised: What is the standard of care in professional negligence cases? General Rule: The Bolam Test states that a professional is not negligent if they acted in accordance with a practice accepted by a responsible body of professionals. 16. Bolitho v City & Hackney Health Authority [1997] Section: Negligence (Duty of Care & Breach) A child suffered brain damage after a doctor failed to attend. The doctor argued that even if they had attended, they would not have intubated. Question Raised: Can a court reject a body of expert opinion if it is not reasonable? General Rule: Yes. The Bolitho Test refines Bolam, allowing courts to disregard expert opinions that are not logically defensible. 17. Nettleship v Weston [1971] Context: A driving instructor was injured due to a learner driver’s mistake. Question Raised: Does a learner driver owe the same duty of care as an experienced driver? General Rule: Yes. The standard of care is objective, meaning all drivers—including learners—must meet the standard of a competent driver. 18. Rigby v Chief Constable of Northamptonshire [1985] Context: The police fired a tear gas canister into a shop during a siege, causing fire damage. Question Raised: Can the police be liable for negligence in operational decisions? General Rule: Yes. Where police actions directly cause harm, they can be held liable, unlike in cases of general crime prevention (e.g., Hill v Chief Constable of West Yorkshire). 19.Osman v Ferguson [1993] Context: The police failed to prevent a teacher from stalking and ultimately murdering a student’s father, despite warnings. Question: Do the police owe a duty of care to individuals in danger? General Rule: Courts ruled there was no liability due to public policy concerns (later challenged by the ECHR in Osman v UK). Case Fiches – Negligence (Causation & Remoteness)

Answer 16

Context: A patient presented at a hospital with symptoms of arsenic poisoning but was sent home without treatment. He later died, and his widow sued for negligence. Question Raised: Can a defendant be liable if negligence occurred but would not have changed the outcome? General Rule: No. The “but for” test applies—if the harm would have occurred anyway, there is no liability.

Answer 17

Context: Two hunters negligently fired in the plaintiff’s direction, injuring him, but it was unclear which shot caused the injury. Question Raised: Can liability be imposed when multiple defendants acted negligently but causation is uncertain? General Rule: Yes. When two negligent parties contribute to a harm, joint liability may be imposed to ensure fair compensation.

Answer 18

Context: A young boy suffered a hip injury, and delayed medical treatment reduced his chance of recovery by 25%. Question Raised: Can a claimant recover damages for loss of chance? General Rule: No. If a claimant cannot show that, on the balance of probabilities, negligence caused the harm, no liability arises.

Answer 19

Context: A doctor misdiagnosed a lump, delaying cancer treatment, which reduced survival chances from 42% to 25%. Question Raised: Is a reduction in survival probability enough for a claim in negligence? General Rule: No. A claim must prove that negligence likely (over 50%) caused the harm.

Answer 20

Context: A premature baby was given excessive oxygen, which was one of five possible causes of blindness. Question Raised: Can liability arise when negligence is only one of several potential causes? General Rule: No. If multiple independent factors could have caused the harm, causation must be proven conclusively.

Answer 21

Context: A worker developed lung disease after prolonged exposure to dust, some of which was due to employer negligence. Question Raised: Can an employer be liable if their negligence contributed to harm but was not the sole cause? General Rule: Yes. If negligence materially contributes to harm, liability arises.

Answer 22

Context: A worker developed dermatitis due to exposure to dust, worsened by lack of washing facilities. Question Raised: Can an employer be liable for increasing the risk of harm? General Rule: Yes. If negligence materially increases risk, causation may be inferred.

Answer 23

Context: Workers developed mesothelioma after exposure to asbestos from multiple employers. Question Raised: When multiple employers expose workers to the same risk, who is liable? General Rule: All employers are jointly liable if each contributed to a material increase in risk.

Answer 24

Context: A parent company was sued for asbestos exposure that occurred at its subsidiary’s workplace. Question Raised: Can a parent company be liable for its subsidiary’s negligence? General Rule: Yes, if the parent company assumed responsibility for employee safety.

Answer 25

Context: A negligently damaged ship suffered further harm from a storm during repairs. Question Raised: Can a natural event break the chain of causation? General Rule: Yes. If an unforeseeable natural event causes additional damage, the original negligence is not liable for the subsequent harm.

Answer 26

Context: A claimant suffered an initial injury due to employer negligence. Later, he fell down stairs while acting recklessly, worsening his injury. Question Raised: Can a claimant’s own conduct break the chain of causation? General Rule: Yes. If a claimant’s unreasonable actions contribute to further harm, liability may be excluded.

Answer 27

Context: A worker, previously injured due to employer negligence, later fell while refueling his car without assistance. Question Raised: Does further injury resulting from an initial harm count as contributory negligence or break causation? General Rule: Contributory negligence applies unless the claimant’s actions are so unreasonable as to break causation.

Answer 28

Context: A negligent driver caused a tunnel crash. A police officer’s reckless command led to another officer’s injury. Question Raised: Can a third party’s actions break causation? General Rule: Yes. If a third party’s actions are highly unforeseeable, they break the chain of causation.

Answer 29

Context: A claimant wore a neck brace after an injury. Unable to use bifocal glasses, she fell and suffered additional injuries. Question Raised: Is a defendant liable for secondary injuries caused by initial harm? General Rule: Yes. If the claimant’s response to an injury is reasonable, the defendant remains liable. The Wagon Mound (No 1) [1961] Context: Oil leaked into a harbor, later igniting and causing damage. The defendant argued the fire was unforeseeable. Question Raised: Must damage be foreseeable to be recoverable? General Rule: Yes. Liability arises only for harm that is a reasonably foreseeable consequence of negligence.

Answer 30

Context: A worker developed a rare disease from contact with rats on a farm. Question Raised: Can liability arise for highly unusual injuries resulting from negligence? General Rule: No. If a specific harm is unforeseeable, liability is excluded.

Answer 31

Context: A worker suffered a minor burn, which triggered a pre-cancerous condition, leading to death. Question Raised: Does a defendant remain liable if a claimant’s pre-existing condition worsens the injury? General Rule: Yes. Under the “thin skull” rule, defendants take claimants as they find them. Case Fiches – Negligence (Defences & Limitations)

Answer 32

Context: A worker rode on the back of an excavator against company instructions. Another vehicle crashed into the excavator, causing severe injuries. Question Raised: Can a claimant’s own recklessness reduce damages in negligence claims? General Rule: Yes. If a claimant fails to take reasonable care for their own safety, damages can be reduced under contributory negligence.

Answer 33

Context: A driver was injured in a crash caused entirely by the defendant but had not been wearing a seatbelt. Question Raised: Can failing to wear a seatbelt be considered contributory negligence? General Rule: Yes. Courts apply standard deductions: 25% if the injury would have been completely avoided, 10% if it would have been less severe.

Answer 34

Context: A woman trapped in a public lavatory attempted to escape by climbing over the door, fell, and sustained injuries. Question Raised: Does an attempt to escape a dangerous situation count as contributory negligence? General Rule: Yes. Though the local authority was liable, the claimant’s risky escape attempt justified a reduction in damages.

Answer 35

Context: A 13-year-old crossed the road outside a zebra crossing and was hit by a car. Question Raised: Can children be held contributorily negligent? General Rule: Generally no. Children are not held to the same standard as adults unless their actions were clearly unreasonable.

Answer 36

Context: A claimant willingly got into a plane with a pilot who had been drinking all day. The plane crashed, injuring the claimant. Question Raised: Can voluntarily engaging in risky behavior prevent a claim in negligence? General Rule: Yes. The claimant’s acceptance of the risk (volenti) barred recovery.

Answer 37

Context: A doctor attempted to rescue workers trapped in a well filled with toxic fumes and died in the process. Question Raised: Does the volenti defense apply in rescue situations? General Rule: No. Rescuers are not considered to have voluntarily assumed the risk.

Answer 38

Context: A worker was forced to use an unruly horse despite raising safety concerns and was later injured. Question Raised: Can an employee be found to have accepted a risk simply by following employer instructions? General Rule: No. Volenti does not apply when an employee is compelled to take a risk.

Answer 39

Context: A passenger encouraged a drunk driver to speed and was injured in the resulting crash. Question Raised: Can a claimant recover damages if they were engaged in an illegal act? General Rule: No. Illegality (ex turpi causa) prevents claims arising from unlawful acts.

Answer 40

Context: A claimant developed PTSD after a train crash, later committed a crime, and sought damages for the consequences of his conviction. Question Raised: Can damages be awarded for losses caused by a claimant’s own criminal actions? General Rule: No. The illegality defense bars recovery for self-inflicted harm resulting from crime.

Answer 41

Context: A claimant sought to recover money used for insider trading, arguing unjust enrichment. Question Raised: Can a claimant recover money paid under an illegal contract? General Rule: Sometimes. Courts assess whether denying the claim would disproportionately harm legal principles. Why Patel Won: * The illegal insider trading never actually took place. * Denying recovery would unjustly enrich Mirza. * Allowing recovery did not undermine the policy behind the law prohibiting insider trading.

Answer 42

Context: A doctor attempted to rescue workers trapped in a well filled with toxic fumes and died in the process. Question: Does the volenti defense apply in rescue situations? General Rule: No. Rescuers are not considered to have voluntarily assumed the risk.

Answer 43

Background/Context: Cutter was hired to work on a ship from Jamaica to Liverpool and was to be paid upon full completion of the voyage. He died before the voyage ended. Legal Question: Is partial performance sufficient to claim payment if full performance was contractually required? General Rule: A party is not entitled to payment unless full performance of the contract is completed, unless otherwise agreed. Reasoning: The court enforced strict performance, holding that since Cutter did not complete the voyage, his estate was not entitled to any payment.

Answer 44

Background/Context: A carpenter made repairs on a ship and claimed payment before all repairs were complete. Legal Question: Can payment be demanded for partial performance where it benefits the other party? General Rule: Partial performance may be accepted for payment if the contract allows or if the party has taken benefit from the work. Reasoning: The court held payment was due for the portion completed and used, recognizing a more flexible application of the performance rule.

Answer 45

Background/Context: Builders completed work with minor defects, and the client refused to pay. Legal Question: Does substantial performance entitle the performing party to payment? General Rule: If substantial performance is rendered, the party may recover the contract price minus deductions for defects. Reasoning: The work was substantially done, and minor defects did not justify total non-payment.

Answer 46

Background/Context: A music hall burned down before a concert was held, making the event impossible. Legal Question: Can a contract be discharged when performance becomes impossible due to no fault of either party? General Rule: A contract is frustrated when a supervening event makes performance impossible. Reasoning: The destruction of the hall released both parties from their obligations due to impossibility.

Answer 47

Background/Context: Builders faced unforeseen delays and increased costs and sought more payment. Legal Question: Does a contract become frustrated if performance becomes more difficult or expensive? General Rule: Mere difficulty or increased expense does not frustrate a contract. Reasoning: The contract was still possible to perform, though less profitable; no frustration occurred.

Answer 48

Background/Context: A trade route was closed, and goods had to be shipped via a more expensive route. Legal Question: Does the closure of a convenient route frustrate a shipping contract? General Rule: A contract is not frustrated if performance remains possible by other means. Reasoning: The contract did not require the use of a specific route, so it was not frustrated.

Answer 49

Background/Context: A warehouse lease was interrupted by road closure for 20 months. Legal Question: Can a lease be frustrated by temporary impossibility of use? General Rule: Frustration can apply to leases but only where performance becomes radically different. Reasoning: A 20-month interruption in a 10-year lease was not enough to frustrate the contract.

Answer 50

Background/Context: Delays occurred in returning a vessel due to external legal and administrative issues. Legal Question: How should frustration be assessed where there is a combination of delays and administrative failures? General Rule: Frustration requires a multi-factorial approach, including risk allocation and foreseeability. Reasoning: The delay did not amount to frustration because the risks were reasonably foreseeable and allocated by the contract.

Answer 51

Background/Context: A ship was delayed due to unseaworthiness caused by crew incompetence. Legal Question: When does a breach justify termination of contract? General Rule: A breach must deprive the other party of substantially the whole benefit of the contract to be repudiatory. Reasoning: The breach did not amount to fundamental deprivation of benefit, so the contract was not discharged.

Answer 52

Background/Context: In an oil shortage, a supplier refused to deliver fuel under a fixed-price agreement. Legal Question: Can specific performance be granted where damages are inadequate? General Rule: Specific performance is available when goods are unique or damages are not adequate. Reasoning: Due to fuel scarcity, money damages were not sufficient; specific performance was granted.

Answer 53

Background/Context: A house buyer sought specific performance against a seller who became disabled. Legal Question: Should specific performance be refused due to hardship? General Rule: Courts may refuse specific performance if it causes undue hardship. Reasoning: The seller’s personal circumstances justified refusal of specific performance.

Answer 54

Background/Context: A fuel supplier was accused of unfair pricing and buyer refused to comply. Legal Question: Is specific performance available when the claimant is not acting equitably? General Rule: A party must come to court with “clean hands” to obtain equitable remedies. Reasoning: Shell’s conduct disqualified it from equitable relief.

Answer 55

Background/Context: A buyer of property sued for distress and inconvenience due to defects. Legal Question: Are damages for distress available in commercial contracts? General Rule: Damages for distress are not usually available unless the contract was for peace of mind. Reasoning: Only modest damages were awarded due to the commercial nature of the transaction.

Answer 56

Background/Context: A ship charter was cancelled but the owner suffered no loss as it was re-hired at a higher rate. Legal Question: Can reliance loss be claimed where there is no actual loss? General Rule: No damages where loss is not suffered or mitigation was successful. Reasoning: The claimant suffered no loss due to successful mitigation.

Answer 57

Background/Context: A production was cancelled when an actor withdrew. Legal Question: Can reliance damages include pre-contractual expenses? General Rule: Pre-contractual reliance costs can be recovered if within the parties’ contemplation. Reasoning: The actor should have foreseen these losses, so recovery was allowed.

Answer 58

Background/Context: A watchmaker died shortly after taking an apprentice’s fee. Legal Question: Is partial failure of consideration enough for recovery? General Rule: There must be total failure of consideration to recover. Reasoning: The apprentice received some benefit, so no recovery was allowed.

Answer 59

Background/Context: A former spy published a book in breach of confidentiality. Legal Question: Can profits be recovered for breach of contract? General Rule: In exceptional cases, an account of profits may be awarded. Reasoning: National security justified a punitive remedy.

Answer 60

Background/Context: A claimant accepted a flight with a drunk pilot and was injured. Legal Question: Does volenti non fit injuria bar recovery? General Rule: Voluntary assumption of risk is a full defence to negligence. Reasoning: The claimant knowingly accepted the risk, so no damages were awarded.

Answer 61

Background/Context: Two underage, intoxicated individuals crashed a motorcycle during illegal activity. Legal Question: Can a claimant recover damages where the claim arises from illegal conduct? General Rule: Claims based on illegal acts are barred under the principle of ex turpi causa. Reasoning: The illegal joint enterprise made it unjust to award damages. Understood. I’m processing all of the requested cases below using the structured format you approved: Background/Context, Legal Question, General Rule, and Reasoning.

Answer 62

Background/Context: Davis agreed to build houses for a fixed price, but due to labour shortages and delays, the work cost significantly more and took longer. Legal Question: Does increased difficulty or expense amount to frustration of a contract? General Rule: A contract is not frustrated merely because it becomes more difficult or expensive to perform. Reasoning: The contract was still capable of being performed and no radically different obligation was imposed; thus, no frustration.

Answer 63

Background/Context: Closure of the Suez Canal forced sellers to ship goods via a longer, costlier route. Legal Question: Does the closure of an expected shipping route frustrate a contract? General Rule: A contract is not frustrated if performance remains physically possible, albeit less convenient or profitable. Reasoning: The sellers could still deliver via the Cape of Good Hope, so frustration did not apply.

Answer 64

Background/Context: A 20-month road closure blocked access to leased premises. Legal Question: Can a lease be frustrated by temporary inaccessibility? General Rule: Leases can, in principle, be frustrated, but only where the interruption renders performance radically different. Reasoning: Since the lease term was 10 years, the 20-month closure was insufficient to frustrate the lease.

Answer 65

Background/Context: Harman promised to lease a property but could not deliver due to lacking title. Legal Question: What measure of damages applies when a contract is breached? General Rule: Damages aim to put the claimant in the position as if the contract had been performed. Reasoning: The claimant was awarded loss of bargain, not just out-of-pocket expenses. 🔍 Facts: * The defendant, Harman, promised to lease a property to the claimant, Robinson, for 21 years. * Robinson, relying on this promise, incurred expenses in preparation to move in. * However, Harman later refused to grant the lease, claiming he had no legal right to do so. * Robinson sued for damages. ⚖️ Legal Issue: What is the correct measure of damages when a party breaches a contract? 🧾 Held: The court ruled in favor of Robinson. 🧷 Principle Established: The purpose of damages in contract law is to put the injured party in the position they would have been in had the contract been properly performed. This is now known as the expectation measure (also called “benefit of the bargain”).

Answer 66

Background/Context: Defendant bought land agreeing to build a wall and then sold it without building. Legal Question: Can a claimant recover the cost of cure rather than diminished value? General Rule: A claimant may recover cost of cure if they genuinely intend to use it to rectify the breach. Reasoning: The court found the claimant was entitled to the full cost of building the promised wall.

Answer 67

Background/Context: A buyer of a defective property claimed distress damages. Legal Question: Are damages for distress recoverable in commercial contracts? General Rule: Damages for inconvenience are generally not available unless the contract is for enjoyment or peace of mind. Reasoning: Only modest damages were awarded; the main focus remained on financial loss.

Answer 68

Background/Context: A buyer sued for cost of remedying major building defects. Legal Question: Should courts award cost of cure where defects severely undermine the property value? General Rule: Where the diminution in value does not compensate the real loss, cost of cure may be appropriate. Reasoning: Cost of cure was appropriate due to significant defects and unique circumstances. 🔍 Facts: * The seller, Hart, agreed to sell a leasehold house to Large, representing that the lease had about 18 years left. * After the sale, it turned out the lease had only 7 years remaining. * Large sued for damages, claiming the property was worth less with a shorter lease. ⸻ ⚖️ Legal Issue: What is the measure of damages when a buyer is misled about the value of what they contractually agreed to buy? ⸻ 🧾 Held: The court ruled in favor of Large (the buyer). ⸻ 🧷 Principle Established: The correct measure of damages is the difference in value between what was promised and what was delivered. This is aligned with the expectation measure established in Robinson v Harman: putting the claimant in the position they would have been in if the representation had been true.

Answer 69

Background/Context: Breach of a restrictive covenant and dispute over appropriate remedy. Legal Question: When can damages reflect a hypothetical release fee or “negotiating damages”? General Rule: Such damages are only available where the loss is not measurable by traditional means. Reasoning: The Supreme Court held that negotiating damages are not standard for all breaches.

Answer 70

Background/Context: A shipowner claimed damages after early contract termination, despite securing better terms. Legal Question: Can damages be claimed if no actual loss was suffered? General Rule: A claimant must prove actual loss; mitigation must be considered. Reasoning: Since the replacement contract was more profitable, no damages were awarded.

Answer 71

Background/Context: Actor Reed pulled out of a production, causing its cancellation. Legal Question: Are pre-contractual expenditures recoverable? General Rule: Pre-contractual expenses are recoverable if they were within the reasonable contemplation of the parties. Reasoning: The court allowed recovery since Reed was aware of the preparation work involved.

Answer 72

Background/Context: A father paid a fee for his son’s apprenticeship. The master died after one year. Legal Question: Is partial failure of consideration sufficient for recovery? General Rule: Recovery is only permitted where there has been a total failure of consideration. Reasoning: Since the apprentice received one year of training, the claim failed.

Answer 73

Background/Context: Investors sued for relying on audit reports in a company takeover. Legal Question: When is a duty of care owed in negligence? General Rule: A duty arises where (1) harm is foreseeable, (2) there is proximity, and (3) it is fair, just and reasonable. Reasoning: The court held no duty was owed because the auditors’ report was not intended for that purpose.

Answer 74

Background/Context: A child left unsupervised ran onto the road, causing a driver to crash and die. Legal Question: Can a third party owe a duty for failing to prevent another’s harmful conduct? General Rule: A duty may arise where there is an assumption of responsibility. Reasoning: The council was liable due to its duty to supervise the child.

Answer 75

Background/Context: A decorator left a house unlocked; a thief entered and stole valuables. Legal Question: Does a defendant owe a duty to prevent harm by third parties? General Rule: A duty may arise where the defendant creates the source of danger. Reasoning: By leaving the house insecure, the decorator was liable for the foreseeable theft.

Answer 76

Background/Context: An elderly woman was injured during a police arrest. Legal Question: Do police owe a duty of care during operational acts? General Rule: Police owe a duty not to cause foreseeable personal injury during operational activities. Reasoning: The Supreme Court allowed the claim, rejecting blanket immunity for the police.

Answer 77

Background/Context: A police informant’s identity was leaked, and she suffered threats. Legal Question: Can the police owe a duty in non-operational decisions? General Rule: Police can owe a duty where they assume responsibility and expose informants to harm. Reasoning: A duty was recognised due to the sensitive and voluntary cooperation of the claimant.

Answer 78

Background/Context: The mother of a murdered woman claimed the police were negligent in failing to catch the serial killer earlier. Legal Question: Do police owe a duty of care to victims of crime generally? General Rule: No duty is owed absent specific assumption of responsibility. Reasoning: Imposing liability would lead to defensive policing; no duty was found.

Answer 79

Background/Context: A fatal crash occurred at a motor race, and spectators sued. Legal Question: What standard of care is required in dangerous sports? General Rule: Reasonableness is judged from the perspective of the “man on the Clapham omnibus”. Reasoning: The injury was an accepted risk of racing; no negligence found.

Answer 80

Background/Context: A tea urn was spilt on children visiting a public tearoom. Legal Question: How is the duty of care assessed? General Rule: A defendant must meet the standard of a reasonable person, not one with hindsight. Reasoning: The accident was unforeseeable; no breach of duty occurred.

Answer 81

Background/Context: Two hunters shot at a duck; one hit the claimant, but it was unclear which. Legal Question: How is liability handled when causation is uncertain? General Rule: Courts may impose joint and several liability where both acted negligently. Reasoning: Both were liable unless one could prove it was not their bullet.

Answer 82

Background/Context: A delayed cancer diagnosis reduced survival chances by 42%. Legal Question: Can damages be awarded for “loss of a chance”? General Rule: Damages are not awarded for loss of a chance where success was below 50%. Reasoning: The claim failed as the chance of survival was under 50% even without negligence.

Answer 83

Background/Context: A worker injured at work later developed a separate disabling illness. Legal Question: Is the employer liable for the full loss of earnings? General Rule: Compensation is reduced for supervening events not caused by the defendant. Reasoning: The second illness was unrelated; damages were limited to the pre-illness period.

Answer 84

Background/Context: An oil spill caused a fire at a nearby dock. Legal Question: Are damages recoverable if the type of damage was unforeseeable? General Rule: Only foreseeable types of damage are recoverable in negligence. Reasoning: Fire damage was not foreseeable from the oil spill; no liability.

Answer 85

Background/Context: A man with a pre-cancerous condition died after a minor burn at work. Legal Question: Is a defendant liable for full injury where the claimant has a predisposition? General Rule: The “thin skull rule” makes a defendant liable for full extent of harm. Reasoning: Since some injury was foreseeable, the defendant was liable for all consequences.

Answer 86

Background/Context: A worker riding unsafely on a vehicle was injured. Legal Question: Does contributory negligence reduce damages? General Rule: Damages may be reduced if the claimant’s carelessness contributed to the harm. Reasoning: His unsafe behaviour contributed to the injury, justifying reduced damages.

contract law Flashcards

(110 cards)