Negligence (personal Injury) Flashcards
(19 cards)
Watson v British Boxing Board of control (2000)
Michael Watson was injured during a boxing match and suffered severe brain injuries. He claimed from the board, arguing that if proper medical facilities had been at ringside, his injuries would have been less severe. The Court of Appeal decided, using the Caparo Test, the board owed him a duty of care as it was the responsible body for licensing professional boxing.
Robinson v Chief Constable of West Yorkshire (2018)
Two policemen were having a violent struggle with a suspect they were trying to arrest. This struggle resulted in them knocking over the claimant, who was an old lady. She claimed damages from the police for her foreseeable personal injury caused by their negligence. The Court rejected the previous judgement that the police had complete immunity.
What legal principle did Donoghue v Stevenson (1932) set out?
Legal Principle: A duty of care is due to your neighbour, this is the person who may be injured by your act or omission.
What legal principle did the case Caparo v Dickman (1990) set out?
Legal principle: set out the precedent for the Caparo Test.
What legal principle did the case Kent v Griffiths (2000) set out?
Legal principle: the damage or harm has to be reasonably foreseeable.
What legal principle did the case Bourhill v Young (1943) set out?
Legal principle: Proximity of relationship - not close enough to have a duty of care.
What legal principle did the case McLoughlin v O’Brain (1982) set out?
Legal Principle: The defendant owes a duty of care to family members.
What legal principle did the case Hill v Chief Constable of West Yorkshire (1990) set out?
Legal principle: it must be fair, just and reasonable to impose a duty
What legal principle did the case Bolam V Friern Barnet Hospital Management Committee (1957) set out?
Legal principle: Sets the precedent for the Bolam test.
What legal principle did the case Nettleship V Weston (1971) set out?
Legal Principle: Learners are expected to show the same standard as a competent drivers.
What legal principle did the case Mullins V Richards (1998) set out?
Legal Principle: Children are assessed against the standard of a reasonable person of the same age.
What legal principle did the case Paris V Stepney Borough Council (1951) set out?
Legal principle: special characteristics must be taken into account with the duty of care.
What legal principle did the case Bolton V Stone (1951) set out?
Legal Principle: when there is a higher risk of injury, the more precautions should be taken.
What legal principle did the case Haley V London Electricity Board (1965) set out?
Legal Principle: the higher the risk, the higher the standard of care.
What legal principle did the case Latimer V AEC Ltd (1953) set out?
Legal principle: There is a breach if sufficient steps have been taken to prevent injury.
What legal principle did the case Roe V Minister of Health (1954) set out?
Legal Principle: If the risk is unknown there can be no breach.
What legal principle did the case Watt V Hertfordshire County Council (1954) set out?
Legal Principle: standard of care may be lower in an emergency situation- for the public benefit.
What legal principle did the case The Wagon Mound set out?
Legal principle: this type of damage must be reasonably foreseeable.
What legal principle did the case Bradford v Robinson Rentals set out?
Legal principle: liable if the type of injury was foreseeable.
