negligence Flashcards
(22 cards)
What are the 3 core elements of a negligence claim?
- Duty of care, 2. Breach of that duty, 3. Damage suffered due to the breach.
What is required beyond showing a duty of care?
The claimant must show that the duty was breached.
How is the standard of care judged?
Objectively—what a reasonable person or competent professional would do.
Does a learner driver have a different standard of care?
No, they are held to the same standard as any competent driver.
(Nettleship v Weston)
What affects the standard of care for professionals?
Level of qualification claimed, not actual experience.
What case shows children are judged differently in standard of care?
Orchard v Lee (2009).
What case is used to illustrate low probability of harm?
Bolton v Stone (1951).
What case contrasts by showing high probability of harm?
Miller v Jackson (1977).
What are the four factors in assessing breach of duty?
- Likelihood of harm, 2. Seriousness of harm, 3. Practicality of precautions, 4. Emergency context.
What case deals with seriousness of harm?
Paris v Stepney BC (1951).
What case deals with practicality and cost of precautions?
Latimer v AEC (1953).
What case deals with emergency situations?
Watt v Herefordshire CC (1954).
What is the standard of proof in civil negligence?
Balance of probabilities.
What case demonstrates standard of proof in negligence?
Ward v Tesco Stores (1976).
What types of damage can a claimant recover?
Physical, mental, financial, or property damage.
What is the “but for” test?
But for the defendant’s actions, would the harm have occurred?
What if there are multiple causes for the harm?
Claimant must show the defendant’s negligence materially increased the risk.
What are the 3 parts of causation in negligence?
Factual causation, legal causation, remoteness of damage.
What are the 3 types of intervening acts that can break causation?
- Act of a third party, 2. Act of the claimant, 3. Act of God.
What case sets out the test for remoteness of damage?
The Wagon Mound (No.1) (1961).
What does the Wagon Mound case say about foreseeability?
The type of loss must be reasonably foreseeable.
What is the Eggshell Skull Rule?
The defendant must take the victim as found—even if they have a pre-existing vulnerability.
