Negligence

Question 1

What are the 3 stages needed to prove a claim for negligence?

Answer 1

1. Duty of care
2. Breach of duty
3. Breach caused damage

Question 2

What is stage 1 of negligence?

Answer 2

The claimant must prove that the defendant owed them a duty of care.

Question 3

What does Lord Atkin in Donoghue v Steven say about stage 1 of negligence?

Answer 3

Lord Atkin developed the ‘neighbour principle’ D must care not to injure their neighbour, this is anyone closely and directly affected by your actions.

Question 4

What is the modern test by Robinson used in stage 1?

Answer 4

Where the duty of care between the D and C is obvious then you will not need to use the Caparo Test. The duty of care is obvious therefore it is fair, just and reasonable to impose this on the D.

Question 5

What is the Caparo Test used in stage 1?

Answer 5

If the duty of care is not obvious or it is a novel situation then you must use the 3 stage Caparo Test. (not needed)

Question 6

What is side rule 1 for stage 1 of negligence?

Answer 6

The police can be sued if they cause injury or damage by their positive act. They cannot be liable for failure to act (omission). (Robinson)

Question 7

What is side rule 2 for stage 1 of negligence?

Answer 7

If the D has insurance then it usually fair, just and reasonable to impose a duty of care.

Question 7

What is side rule 3 for stage 1 of negligence?

Answer 7

If the emergency service makes the risk higher, they will owe a duty of care if the risk is substantially higher.

Question 8

What is stage 2 of negligence?

Answer 8

Was there a breach of duty?

Question 9

What is the first part of stage 2 of negligence? (2A)

Answer 9

The C must show that the D was in breach of their duty of care. D is judged by the standards of a fair and reasonable person.

Question 10

What does Alderson B in Blyth v Birmingham Waterworks say about 2A?

Answer 10

Defined the breach as ‘doing something a reasonable man wouldn’t do or not doing something a reasonable man would do.’ Therefore the D did not act reasonably as they have acted in a way that falls below the standard of a reasonable man.

Question 11

What is the second part of stage 2 of negligence? (2B)

Answer 11

The second part examines the characteristics of a reasonable person.

Question 12

What are the three characteristics examined in 2B?

Answer 12

1. Experienced person
2. Inexperienced/learner
3. A child/young person

Question 13

What does Bolom and Bolitho say about an experienced person? (2B)

Answer 13

If the person is an expert or possesses a particular skill, then they will be judged by the standards of other competent professionals.

Question 14

What does Nettleship v Weston say about inexperienced people or learners? (2B)

Answer 14

If D is inexperienced then they are judged by the standards of someone experienced or competent (average skill).

Question 15

What does Mullins v Richards say about a child or young person? (2B)

Answer 15

Children are judged by the standards of a reasonable child of a similar age.

Question 16

What is the third part of stage 2 of negligence? (2C)

Answer 16

Risk factors meaning what is the risk of harm?

Question 17

What is the probability of harm? (2C)

Answer 17

The higher the probability of harm the more precautions the D will be expected to take. The reasonable man does not need to take precautions against very small risks but does take precautions against bigger risks. (Bolton v Stone)

Question 18

What is the magnitude of risk? (2C)

Answer 18

The more serious the risk, the more care that needs to be taken. (Paris v Stepney Council)

Question 19

What is cost and practicality? (2C)

Answer 19

If the cost of taking the precautions is low, your standard of care will go up. You will be expected to take those precautions. (Latimer)

Question 20

What is the side rule for 2C?

Answer 20

Social utility- there are some risks that are beneficial for society, here there will be no breach. (Watt v Hertfordshire)

Question 21

What is stage 3 of negligence?

Answer 21

The C must prove that the breach caused caused their damage or injury. (Issue of causation)

Question 22

What is the first part of stage 3 of negligence? (3A)

Answer 22

Factual causation- uses the ‘but for’ test’. ‘But for D’s actions/omissions would C have suffered the damage?’ (Chelsea v Barnett Hospital)

Question 23

What is the second part of stage 3 of negligence? (3B)

Answer 23

Legal causation (Remoteness of damage)- was the damage reasonable foreseeable or was it too remote? If it is foreseeable then legal causation is established. (Wagon Mound No1)

Question 24

What is the side rule for legal causation? (3B)

Answer 24

Precise Injury- the D does not need to predict the precise way in which the injury was caused as long as an injury of some kind was foreseeable. (Hughes v Lord Advocate)

Question 25

What is the third part of stage 3 of negligence? (3C)

Answer 25

There must be no intervening act which breaks the chain of causation.

Question 26

What does the Thin Skull Rule say? (3C)

Answer 26

If C is suffering from a vulnerability, D is still liable as they ‘must take their C as they find them.’ (Robinson v Post Office/Smith v Leech Brain Co)