Liability for Physical Injury and Damage to Property Flashcards
(17 cards)
What is the three part test used to establish duty of care and which case did it come from?
Caparo v Dickman 1990
- reasonably foreseeable c/their property would be affected
- sufficient proximity in time and space
- fair just and reasonable to impose DoC on D
How would D breach DoC and the high case is linked to breach?
Blyth v Birmingham waterworks
Failed to reach standard of care required of a reasonable person
What are the 4 special characteristics?
Learner/trainee
Professional
Sports
Child
Standard of care expected of a learner/trainee and case
Someone holding themselves out as having a skill are required to reach SoC expected of persons doing that activity
Nettleship v Weston
Standard of care expected of a professional and case
Standard of an ordinary, competent member of that profession: Bolam v Friern hospital
Standard of care expected of a sports player and case
Reasonable person playing at D’s level
Caldwell v Maguire
Standard of care expected of a child and case
Reasonable child of D’s age
Mullins v Richards 1998
What do risk factors do?
Raise or lower standard of care
Two risk factors which raise standard of care and cases
- Higher risk of harm: Bolton v Stone
- Risk of serious harm: Paris v Stepney
The risk factor which lowers standard of care + case?
Emergency situation: Watt v Hertfordshire 1954
What risk factor do the courts consider + case?
The cost and effort of taking adequate precautions
Latimer v AEC
Define factual cause + case?
‘but for’ D’s breach the harm wouldn’t have occurred: Barnett v Chelsea hospital
Define legal cause
Where D is negligence and a second event caused further damage.
What are the 3 intervening acts?
- Act of God
- C’s conduct : Mckew v Holland
- Act of a third party : Knightly v Johns
Definition of danger too far removed + case?
D won’t be liable if they can prove the harm was not reasonably foreseeable
Wagon Mound 1961
Bradford v Robinson’s rentals?
Harm must be reasonably foreseeable as a result of D’s negligence
Hughes v Lords Advocate 1963?
Liable due to reasonably foreseeable harm rather than the specific damage that actually occurred
