Tort Flashcards
(57 cards)
What is the definition of negligence?
A breach of a legal duty of care owed to a claimant that results in harm to the claimant, undesired by the defendant.
What are the four elements that must be proven in a negligence claim?
- Duty of care, 2. Breach of duty, 3. Causation, 4. Defenses (if applicable)
Name 5 established duty situations.
- Road users to other road users, 2. Doctor to patient, 3. Employer to employee, 4. Manufacturer to consumer, 5. Teacher to pupil
What types of damage do established duties typically cover?
Physical damage (personal injury or property damage) - NOT pure economic loss or pure psychiatric harm.
State the Neighbour Principle from Donoghue v Stevenson [1932]
“You must take reasonable care to avoid acts or omissions which you can reasonably foresee would be likely to injure your neighbour”
How is “neighbour” defined in the Neighbour Principle?
“Persons who are so closely and directly affected by my act that I ought reasonably to have them in my contemplation”
What case established the three-part test for duty of care in novel situations?
Caparo Industries plc v Dickman [1990]
What are the three parts of the Caparo test?
- Reasonable foreseeability of harm to the claimant, 2. Sufficient proximity of relationship between claimant and defendant, 3. Fair, just and reasonable to impose a duty
What is the general rule regarding liability for omissions?
No duty of care is owed for omissions (failing to act).
What are the 3 exceptions to the general rule against liability for omissions?
- Duty not to make the situation worse when choosing to act, 2. Special relationships of control, 3. When one person has control over another who might harm third parties
Give 4 examples of special relationships of control.
Employer-employee, schools-children, parents-children, instructors-pupils
Why might police not owe a duty of care for negligent investigations?
Their duty is to the public at large, not specific individuals - based on Hill v Chief Constable of West Yorkshire [1989]
A hospital fails to secure premises and a violent patient escapes and harms someone. Does a duty exist?
Yes - hospital has control over patient who poses foreseeable risk to others (Home Office v Dorset Yacht Co Ltd [1970])
Which case established that auditors don’t owe duty of care to potential investors reading statutory accounts?
Caparo Industries plc v Dickman [1990]
Which case established the principle about control over those who may cause harm?
Home Office v Dorset Yacht Co Ltd [1970]
Which case established there’s generally no liability for omissions?
Stovin v Wise [1996]
What standard applies to skilled defendants (professionals)?
The Bolam test - must show skill/care expected of reasonable professional in that field
What is the Bolitho principle?
The court ultimately decides if professional standard is reasonable - professional practice must be capable of withstanding logical analysis
What standard applies to learner drivers?
Standard of reasonably competent drivers (Nettleship v Weston) - no allowance for lack of experience
What standard applies to junior doctors?
Must show competence expected of doctors in that post (Wilsher v Essex AHA) - judged by task undertaken, not experience
What standard applies to amateur DIYers?
Standard of reasonably competent amateur (Wells v Cooper)
What standard applies to children?
Standard adjusted for child’s age - care reasonable for ordinary child of same age (Mullin v Richards)
What principle does Bolton v Stone establish about small risks?
Not necessary to eliminate very small risks - must guard against reasonable probabilities, not fantastic possibilities
What principle does Paris v Stepney BC establish?
More serious potential harm requires greater care (blind worker needed extra protection)
