Flashcards in Difficult Tort Deck (20)
Stark v Post Office.
Statutory obligations are often strict
Smith v Baker
Workers do not consent to risks
Caswell v Powell
Workers are unlikely to be found to be guilty of contributory negligence
Wheeler v New Merton Mill
No volenti in statuory cases
What is the duty in Hatton v Sutherland?
The "threshold question" in Hatton is: Was the worker reasonably foreseeably at risk of injury to health through stress?
This question is made up of two parts:
1. The nature and extent of the work
2. Signs from the employee
Melville v Home Office
An employer was found to be liable for stress at work from a prison officer who had seen several dead bodies of suicide victims
Lister v Hesley Hall
Intentional and even illegal acts can still result in vicarious liability
Rose v Plenty
Mikround case- vicarious liability found
Poland v Parr
The employer was liable for someone pushing a customer away to protect a stall
Warren v Henley's
The employer was not liable for the employee punching a customer
Twine v Bean's express
There was no vicarious liability to a hitchhiker who had been picked up
Hilton v Thomas Burton
Visiting a relative at the end of the day was "on a frolic"
Harvey v O'Dell
Getting lunch was not on a "frolic"
General Cleaning Contractors v Christmas
The duty to provide a safe system of work exists wherever the employee is working
Bux v Slough Metal
The employer must supervise the safe system of work
Century Instance v NI Road Transport Board
Doing an authorised act in an unauthorised way is in the course of employment
Ratcliffe v McConnell
Volenti applies in trespass cases. If the claimant is aware of the risk, then s1(6) of the Occupiers Liability Act will apply
Tomlinson v Congleton
The danger must be caused by the "state of the premises" or something that is done or should be done to them
What is the difference between Donogue v Folkstone Properties and Rhind v Astbury?
1.In Rhind- the claimant failed to satisfy s1(3)a as the occupier didn't know there was an obstruction in the like
2. In Donogue the claimant failed to satisfy s1(3)b as the occupier did not have reasonable grounds to believe a trespasser would be swimming off Folkestone harbour