Negligence 2B

Question 1

What is the definition of Negligence?

Answer 1

The failure to do something where you had a duty of care to do so.

Question 2

What are some examples of negligence?

Answer 2

Faulty products
Dangerous equipment at work
Dangerous shop
Medical
Road traffic Accident
Food poisoning
Dangerous play in organised sports

Question 3

What does ‘tort’ mean?

Answer 3

Civil wrong

Question 4

What is the standard of proof in civil cases?

Answer 4

Balance of probabilities

Question 5

What is the purpose of tort?

Answer 5

To restore the injured party to original position.

Question 6

What 3 things does the Claimant need to prove for the Defendant to be found negligent?

Answer 6

1. D owed C a duty of care
2. D breached that DoC
3. That caused the damage to C (which was not too remote)

Question 7

In what case was negligence created?

Answer 7

Donoghue v Stevenson

Question 8

Until 2018, what test was used to determine if D owed a duty of care?

Answer 8

The Caparo Test

Question 9

Where did the Caparo test come from

Answer 9

Caparo v Dickman

Question 10

When would you need to apply the Caparo test?

Answer 10

Only when the scenario question literally says something about the situation being a ‘novel’ or ‘new’ situation.

Question 11

What are the three questions in the Caparo test?

Answer 11

1. Is the damage to C reasonably foreseeable?
2. Is there a proximity between D and C?
3. Is it fair, just and reasonable to impose a duty of care on D?

Question 12

What is a proximity?

Answer 12

Physical closeness (being in the same place at the same time)
Or
Relationship (where C was dependent on D or because D had knowledge of C’s situation)
FRIENDS DO NOT COUNT (as it is hard to prove who your friends are)

Question 13

Which case is now used instead of the Caparo test?

Answer 13

Robinson v CCoWY (west yorkshire)

Question 14

What did the court say in Robinson?

Answer 14

If a duty has been proven to exist in a similar situation before, it should exist in the current case too. It is only in new/ novel situations where the Caparo test would be used.

Question 15

In a case where imposing a Duty of Care WOULD be carried out, which case would be used in relation?

Answer 15

Jolley v Sutton

Question 16

In a case where imposing a Duty of Care would NOT be carried out, which case is used in relation?

Answer 16

Bourhil v Young

Question 17

Which case defines breach of duty?

Answer 17

Blyth v BWW

Question 18

What does Blyth v BWC define breach of duty as?

Answer 18

D does not do something that a reasonable man would or D does something that a reasonable man would not.

Question 19

What does Nettleship v Weston say?

Answer 19

Inexperience does not lower the standard of care.

Question 20

What does Bolam v Friern Barnet HMC say?

Answer 20

Expertise can raise the standard of care.
The defendant will only be compared to a professional when
1) D actually has the skill of a professional.
2) D is acting in a way where they would be expected to be a professional.

Question 21

What does Wells v Cooper say?

Answer 21

If carrying out DIY, D would not be compared to a professional but rather a reasonable person doing DIY.

Question 22

What does Mullin v Richards say?

Answer 22

Age can lower the standard of care.

Question 23

What are the four risk factors in deciding whether D has reached the standard of care expected?

Answer 23

Size of risk
Seriousness of harm
Practicability of precautions
Benefits of taking a risk

Question 24

What is the definition of size of risk?

Answer 24

How likely the harm is it happen

Question 25

What principle came from Bolton v Stone?

Answer 25

The reasonable man will take less precautions against a small risk of harm

Question 26

What legal principle came from Miller v Jackson?

Answer 26

If the risk of harm is high the reasonable man would take more precautions.

Question 27

What is the definition of seriousness of potential harm?

Answer 27

How bad the harm could be if it happens.

Question 28

What legal principle came from Paris v SBC?

Answer 28

The reasonable man will take more care when the potential harm to C could be serious.

Question 29

What is the definition of practicability of precautions?

Answer 29

How practical it was to take precautions to reduce the risk of harm.

Question 30

What legal principle came from Latimer v AEC?

Answer 30

The reasonable man would take precautions which are proportionate to the size of risk and the seriousness of the potential harm.

Question 31

What is the definition of potential benefits of taking the risk?

Answer 31

Is the benefit going to outweigh the risk?

Question 32

What legal principle came from Watt v HCC?

Answer 32

The reasonable man would take a risk if the potential benefit to be gained outweighs the risk.

Question 33

What must C prove that D's breach was?

Answer 33

1. Caused the damage. 2. The damage caused was not too remote.

Question 34

Which type of causation is used when deciding if the breach caused the damage?

Answer 34

Factual

Question 35

Which case holds the 'But for' test for civil cases?

Answer 35

Barnett v C&KHMC (Barnett)

Question 36

When will intervening acts prevent D from being liable?

Answer 36

When the actions are unreasonable and unforeseeable.

Question 37

Which case is used for intervening acts when it does not break the chain of causation?

Answer 37

Reeves v MPC

Question 38

Which case is used for intervening acts when it does break the chain of causation?

Answer 38

Wilkin-Shaw v Fuller

Question 39

Which case says the type of damage must be reasonably foreseeable?

Answer 39

The Wagon Mound.

Question 40

Which case says that how the damage is caused can be unforeseeable?

Answer 40

Hughes v Lord Advocate.

Question 41

Which case says the extent of the damage can be unforeseeable?

Answer 41

Bradford v Robinson Rentals.

Question 42

Which case says hidden characteristics or vulnerabilities do not break the chain of causation?

Answer 42

Smith v Leech Brain.

Question 43

What is the structure of an evaluation?

Answer 43

Intro, 4 developed paragraphs including Point, Positive, Negative and a link back to the question, as well as a conclusion.

Question 44

What are the 2 types of general defences?

Answer 44

Contributory Negligence Volenti Non-Fit Injuria

Question 45

What type of defence is contributory negligence?

Answer 45

Partial.

Question 46

What type of defence is Volenti?

Answer 46

Full.

Question 47

Where is contributory negligence defined in law?

Answer 47

The Law Reform (contributory negligence) Act 1945.

Question 48

What does the Law Reform Act say about contributory negligence?

Answer 48

The damages awarded to the claimant can be reduced depending on the extent to which the claimant contributes to his own injury.

Question 49

Give a case example where damages were reduced.

Answer 49

Sayers v Harlow UDC

Question 50

How would you structure an evaluation of contributory negligence in a scenario?

Answer 50

1. What did C do? Was it dangerous? 2. If C didn't do it, what would have happened? 3. Would damages be reduced?

Question 51

What are the 3 elements of Volenti?

Answer 51

1. C knows the precise risk involved. 2. C is able to exercise free choice. 3. C voluntarily accepted the risk.

Question 52

What is the definition of knowing the precise risk involved?

Answer 52

Knowing the nature of the actual risk not just a general risk.

Question 53

What doesn't matter when knowing the precise risk involved?

Answer 53

Whether C 'should' have known.

Question 54

Which case is used with precise risk?

Answer 54

Stermer v Lawson

Question 55

What legal principle came from Stermer v Lawson?

Answer 55

C must not know there is a general risk, he must know that there is a risk of what happened actually happening.

Question 56

Which case is used with free choice?

Answer 56

Smith v Baker

Question 57

What legal principle came from Smith v Baker?

Answer 57

Where C is forced into accepting the risk, he has not exercised free choice.

Question 58

Which case is used for when someone has a duty to act?

Answer 58

Ogwo v Taylor

Question 59

What legal principle came from Ogwo v Taylor?

Answer 59

Where C has a duty to act they are forced to act and cannot exercise free choice.

Question 60

What case is used for voluntary acceptance of risk?

Answer 60

ICI v Shatwell

Question 61

What legal principle came from ICI v Shatwell?

Answer 61

Where C is not being forced, he accepts the risk voluntarily.