Negligence

Question 1

Introduction to negligence

Answer 1

C may have a claim against the D in negligence

Question 2

What are the three stages of negligence

Answer 2

1. D must owe the C a duty of care
2. The duty of care must be breached
3. The breach of duty must have caused the damage

Question 3

Stage 1 - Duty of care

Answer 3

Firstly it must be proved that the D owes the C a duty of care

Question 4

Stage 1 - one owes a duty of care to their neighbour

Answer 4

Lord Atkin in Donoghue and stevenson developed the “neighbour principle”
Neighbour is anyone closely & directly affected by one’s actions

Question 5

Stage 1 - obvious relationship

Answer 5

C & D have an obvious duty of care (…)
So it is obvious a duty is owed - Robinson
Therefore we do not need the caparo test

Question 6

Stage 2 - breach of duty

Answer 6

The d must have breached A duty of care to the C

Question 7

Stage 2 - objective test (definition of breach)

Answer 7

In Alderson B in Blyth v Birmingham waterworks defined breach as “ don’t Ng something a reasonable man wouldn’t do or not doing something a reasonable man would do”

Question 8

Stage 2 - expert/learner/child

Answer 8

Expert - Bolom
Learner - nettleship v Weston
Child - Mullins v Richard

Question 9

Stage 2 - judged by standard of..??

Answer 9

An expert will be judged by the standard of another reasonable competent professional

A inexperienced/learner will be judged by the standard of someone experienced and competent

Children will be judged by the standard of a reasonable child of similar age

Question 10

Stage 2 - Risk factors

Answer 10

Risk factors can raise or lower the standard of care required of the reasonable person

Question 11

Stage 2 - risk factors

Answer 11

Probability of harm - Bolton v stone

What is the seriousness/ magnitude if the risk - Paris v Stephens council

The cost and practicality of precautions - latimer v AEC

Question 12

Stage 2 - probability of harm

Answer 12

More care needed to be taken if there is a higher probability of harm. The reasonable man need not take precautions for small risks but does take precautions against bigger risks or risks that are more likely to happen
BOLTON V STONE

Question 13

Stage 2 - what is the seriousness/magnitude of the risk

Answer 13

The court needs to consider how serious the injury could potentially be. The bigger the risk of injury the more care that needs to be taken
PARIS V STEPNEY COUNCIL

Question 14

Stage 2- cost and practicality of precautions

Answer 14

If the cost of taking precautions to eliminate the risk is too great , the D may not be in breach
LATIMER V AEC

Question 15

Stage 2 - side rule - possible benefits of the risk

Answer 15

Watt V Herefordshire council
Some risks that have benefits to society (social utility of the risk) - no breach
Means the courts considers that the risk was worth taking for the wider public benefit to society

Question 16

Stage 3 - breach caused the damage

Answer 16

It must be proved that the breach of duty caused the damage to the C . This is an issue of causation

Question 17

Stage 3 - factual causation

Answer 17

Barnett v Chelsea hospital
But for test - but for the Ds actions/omissions would the damage have occured

Question 18

Stage 3 - legal causation (remoteness of the damage)

Answer 18

Wagon mound No1
Whether the damage to the C was reasonably foreseeable or was it too remote?
If damage was unforeseeable then it may be too remote and D will not be the cause

Question 19

Stage 3 - side rule

Answer 19

Hughes v Lord advocate
D need not predict the precise way in which the injury was caused as long as injury of the same time was foreseeable

Question 20

Stage 3 - intervening acts

Answer 20

There must be no new intervening acts which breaks the chain of causation
Thin scull rule : Robinson’s v post office . The defendant must take his claimant as he finds hims