negligence Flashcards
(32 cards)
what do you first have to establish in negligence
a duty of care
how do you establish a duty of care
test from Robinson v CCWY
what are the 3 questions asked from Robinson v CCWY
- is there existing precedent?
- is there an existing statue
- where the question or duty of care has not already been addressed, courts will look at the closest analogies in existing law
what do you have the then identify after you have identified a duty of care
a breach in the DoC
what is the objective test that is used to establish breach and the case?
the reasonable man test
Blythe v Birmingham Waterworks
what is the reasonable man test?
addresses the ‘reasonable person’ and asks ‘what would a reasonable person of ordinary prudence have done in the defendant’s situation? The particular defendant’s own characteristics are usually ignored.
what are the 5 class’ of defendant that will effect duty of care?
- professional
- children
- people engaged in sport
- the disabled
- people using equipment
case for if defendant is a professional?
Bolam v Friern Hospital
cases for if defendant is a child and principle?
Mullins v Richard and Orchard v Lee duty of care owed by a child is that of an ordinarily careful and reasonable child of the same age.
case for if defendant is a person in sport and principle?
Condon v Basi
people in higher levels of sport owe a greater DoC than people playing in lower leagues
principle from Nettleship v Weston?
a learner is held to the same DoC standard as the competent person
what are the factors that may raise or lower the standard of care?
- foreseeability if risk
- size of risk
- practicalities of precautions
- social utility
case for foreseeability of risk?
Bolton v Stone
case for size of risk?
Paris v Stepney
case for practicalities of precautions?
Latimer v AEC
case for social utility?
Watt v Hertfordshire
what do you do after establishing a breach?
establish damage/causation
how do you prove factual causation and case?
the ‘but for’ test
Barnett v Chelsea and Kensington
what is the ‘but for’ test
claimant would not have suffered the injury/damage ‘but for’ the defendant’s negligent act or omissions
how do you prove legal causation and case?
remoteness of damage
Wagon Mound (no 1)
what do you have to think when talking about remoteness of breach?
is the loss a reasonably foreseeable consequence of the negligence (and not something else)
what is the thin skull rule and case?
take your victim as you see him
Smith v Leech Brain
what are the two defences for negligence?
- contributory negligence
- volenti (consent)
explain contributory negligence with a case?
its a partial defence and is when the claimant acts carelessly
Froome v Butcher
