Law Cases Negligence

Question 1

Duty Of care (neighbour principle)

Answer 1

Donoghue V Stevenson
Manafacturers of the drink owed a duty of care and were at fault in the manafacturing process.

Question 2

Caparo test

Answer 2

Was damage foreseeable?
Is there sufficient Proximity between claimant and defendant.
Is it fair just and reasonable to impose a duty

Question 3

Damage or reasonably Foreseeable

Answer 3

Kent V Griffiths: The control centre accepted the call and as they failed in there duty were liable

Question 4

Proximity

Answer 4

Bourhill V Young: He could not anticipate the effect of accident and was not proximate to her and did not owe a duty of care

Question 5

Fair Just and reasonable to impose a duty

Answer 5

Hill V Chief constable: The Police had no way of knowing the next victim so was not liable.

Question 6

Reasonable Learner

Answer 6

Nettleship V Weston

Question 7

Reasonable Child

Answer 7

Mullins V Richard: As she had reached the required standard for a child she did not breach duty.

Question 8

The Reasonable Professional

Answer 8

Bolam v Barnet Hospital:
The doctors followed these courtrooms of actions, there had been no breach of the duty of care

Question 9

Special Characteristics

Answer 9

Paris V Stepney Borough Council: Employers had broken duty of care to him as he was blind.

Question 10

Size of risk

Answer 10

Bolton V Stone: Cricket club had done everything needed to make it low risk so it had not breached duty to claimant

Question 11

Factual Causation

Answer 11

Barnett V Chelsea And Kensington Hospital: She was able to prove the doctor owed a duty of care by not carrying out an examination

Question 12

Remoteness Of Damage

Answer 12

The Wagon Mound: This type of damage was too remote from the original negligent act.

Question 13

Eggshell Skull Rule

Answer 13

Smith V Leech Brain:Defendant Liable for all consequences of negligence