LAW P2 CASES (NEGLIGENCE)

Question 1

What are the cases for the first neighbour principle requirement?

Answer 1

• Home office v Dorset yacht co, it was reasonably foreseeable that harm would occur
• The Wagon Mound no.1, the fire was not a foreseeable result of the oil spill

Question 2

What is the case for the second neighbour principle requirement?

Answer 2

• Bourhill v Young, there was not sufficient proximity between the claimant and defendant when the harm occured
• Robinson v Chief constable of west Yorkshire, The police owe a duty of care to members of the public who are in close physical proximity to their operational actions

Question 3

What is the case for the second negligence requirement?

Answer 3

• Nettleship v Weston, a learner driver owes the same duty of care as a qualified driver

Question 4

What is the case for the third negligence requirement?

Answer 4

• Smith v Leech brain, the defendant is liable for the full extent of the claimants injury
• Reeves v Commissioner of police, the police’s omission caused ‘harm in fact’ as they had a duty to prevent self-harm in custody

Question 5

What is the case for the fourth negligence requirement?

Answer 5

Montgomery v Lankarkshire health board, doctors must inform patients of risks and seek consent

Question 6

What is the case for the causation (but for test) for negligence?

Answer 6

Barnett v Chelsea and kensington hospital, if the result would not have occured but for the defendants actions, then the defendant is not liable