Negligence: Duty of Care and Physical Injury Cases Flashcards Preview

Tort > Negligence: Duty of Care and Physical Injury Cases > Flashcards

Flashcards in Negligence: Duty of Care and Physical Injury Cases Deck (3)
Loading flashcards...
1

Maitland v Raisbeck (1944)

It is not in every case that 'where there's blame, a claim'. Sometimes, accidents just happen. They key point here is that one needs to take reasonable care not to cause harm. If both parties have taken reasonable care but an accident nevertheless occurs, "the person injured must put up with it" (Lord Greene MR at p. 693).

2

Barrett v Ministry of Defence (1995)

One has to take responsibility for one's own actions. However, one can assume responsibility by (in this case) e.g. starting to look after a drunken sailor, but failing to provide appropriate attention - leading to his death. One can, therefore, acquire a duty where there wasn't one in the first place.

3

Topp v London Country Bus (1993)

No liability can be found against D, even if in a 'broad sense' D's actions are blameworthy. In this case, the third parties interfered themselves and caused the death of C's wife; there is no duty of care owed particularly by D.