Negligence - Basic Standard Flashcards Preview

Tort Law > Negligence - Basic Standard > Flashcards

Flashcards in Negligence - Basic Standard Deck (33):
1

Woolridge v Sumner

Photographer was trampled by horse, the rider wasn't liable as they were doing all they could in the heat of the moment.

2

Blake v Galloway

It is partly the need to act quickly and partly the legitimate expectations of consenting participants that justify the variations in standard.

3

Roberts v Ramsbottom

Man suffered stroke while driving, held he wasn't allowed to escape liability unless the actions were completely out of his control.

4

Mansfield v Weetabix

Driver who did not know that he had hypoglycaemia was exonerated, key issue was lack of knowledge.

5

Dunnage v Randall and UK Insurance

Nephew was badly burned when he tried to stop his uncle from killing himself. Sued the uncle's estate. The uncle had a mental disorder, but there was no principle to excuse a person from liability where they failed to meet the "normal" standard.

6

Mullin v Richards

Objective test took account of girls ages, what would the ordinary, prudent and reasonable fifteen year old do?

7

Jackson v Murray

Thirteen year old girl was injured when she walked out behind a bus and was hit by a car, damages were reduced by 50% to reflect her share of the fault.

8

James v Butler

Builder helped neighbour with work way within the scope of his abilities, he was responsible for the resulting injuries.

9

Luxmoore May v Messenger May Baverstock

Small town auctioneers not held to same standard as Christies in London.

10

Phillips v William Whitely

Ear piercers not held to same standard as surgeons.

11

Perry v Harris

Reasonable parent test. Child was injured at birthday party when parent momentarily left bouncy castle unattended. Held that it was not foreseeable that such injury would occur, standard of care was that which would protect the children of risk of foreseeable injury.

12

Williams v Williams

Distinguished Perry v Harris, mother was 25% responsible for child's injuries in car crash as she was not using the correct car seat.

13

Nettleship v Weston

Learner driver was held to the same standard as ordinary experienced driver.

14

Bolam v Friern Hospital

No negligence if a medical professional has acted in accordance with a practice accepted as proper by a responsible body of medical men skilled in that particular art.

15

Bolitho v City and Hackney HA

In rare cases expert knowledge may be dismissed as illogical.

16

Penney v East Kent HA

Bolam doesnt apply to findings of fact.

17

Montgomery v Lanarkshire HB

Woman was not warned about risk of shoulder dystocia when she should have been. Held that Bolam doesnt apply to determination of risks which should be disclosed to patients. The doctor cannot form an objective view of what the patient deems relevant. The patient should have been presented with the information and a discussion should have happened.

18

The Wagon Mound

Risk was unreasonable, shouldn't have been run.

19

Bolton v Stone

Cricket balls leaving pitch, risk was low, cost of building a taller fence wasn't comparative to risk of harm.

20

Learned Hand's Formula

Liability exists where burden of avoidance is less than the probability of injury.

21

US v Carroll Towing

Court set extremely high damages to stop people taking risks simply because the benefits were higher than the potential damages.

22

Ward v Tesco Stores

C slipped on yoghurt in Tesco store, evidence of the accident constituted a prima facie case, the accident wouldn't have occured without negligence.

23

Piccolo v Larkstock

Defendant should have had a proactive system of cleaning to prevent accidents.

24

Bolam v Friern Hospital

No negligence if a medical professional has acted in accordance with a practice accepted as proper by a responsible body of medical men skilled in that particular art.

25

Bolitho v City and Hackney HA

In rare cases expert knowledge may be dismissed as illogical.

26

Penney v East Kent HA

Bolam doesnt apply to findings of fact.

27

Montgomery v Lanarkshire HB

Woman was not warned about risk of shoulder dystocia when she should have been. Held that Bolam doesnt apply to determination of risks which should be disclosed to patients. The doctor cannot form an objective view of what the patient deems relevant. The patient should have been presented with the information and a discussion should have happened.

28

The Wagon Mound

Risk was unreasonable, shouldn't have been run.

29

Bolton v Stone

Cricket balls leaving pitch, risk was low, cost of building a taller fence wasn't comparative to risk of harm.

30

Learned Hand's Formula

Liability exists where burden of avoidance is less than the probability of injury.

31

US v Carroll Towing

Court set extremely high damages to stop people taking risks simply because the benefits were higher than the potential damages.

32

Ward v Tesco Stores

C slipped on yoghurt in Tesco store, evidence of the accident constituted a prima facie case, the accident wouldn't have occured without negligence.

33

Piccolo v Larkstock

Defendant should have had a proactive system of cleaning to prevent accidents.