Tort - General Negligence - Breach Cases Flashcards Preview

Law - Tort > Tort - General Negligence - Breach Cases > Flashcards

Flashcards in Tort - General Negligence - Breach Cases Deck (17)
Loading flashcards...
1

Blyth v Birmingham Waterworks

Breach - standard of care

Negligence is the omission to do something which a reasonable man would do, or doing something which a prudent or reasonable man wouldn't do.

2

Glasgow Corp. v Muir

The standard of care is that of a reasonable person; it is an objective test.

3

Roe v Ministry of Health

Contaminated anaesthetics

D's conduct should be considered based on the state of knowledge at the time.

4

Bolam v Friern Hospital

A Doctor must show the same degree of skill as a reasonable doctor

Where actions of a doctor are supported by a reasonable body of professional opinion, they will not be considered to have fallen below the standard of care required.

5

Bolitho v City of Hackney

Dead 2 yr old from negligence

A doctor can be liable for negligence despite a professional body sanctioning his actions where it has not been demonstrated to the judge's satisfaction that the body of opinion relied on was reasonable or responsible.

6

Wilsher v Essex Area Health Authority

Junior Doctor - premature baby - oxygen - blind

A junior doctor on his first day on the wards must come up to the standard of a hypothetical competent doctor in that post.

If causation cannot be established, a claim in negligence will fail.

7

Wells v Cooper

Standard of care - DIY

Degree of care and skill required of a householder undertaking his own repairs is to be measured by reference to the degree of care and skill of a reasonably skilled amateur carpenter.

8

Mullin v Richards

Girls fencing with rulers

Standard expected of a child is not the standard of a reasonable person, but that of a reasonable and "ordinarily prudent" child of that age.

9

Bolton v Stone

Cricket ball injury

Where a risk is so highly improbable that a reasonable person could not have anticipated the harm to the claimant and would not have taken any action to avoid it, D will not be in breach for not taking greater precautions.

10

Miller v Jackson

Cricket ball injury - more likely

Where risk of injury or harm is foreseeable and relatively high, D will be negligent for not taking adequate precautions to avoid injury or harm to C.

11

Paris v Stepney

Splinter of metal into eye - already blind in 1 eye

D will have greater obligations to individuals who run a risk of suffering greater damage than normal.

Duty of care of an employer is owed to every employee individually.

12

Latimer v AEC

Flooded factory floor + oil + sawdust

Where risk is low and cost and practicalities are high, D is only obliged to take reasonable precautions to minimise the risk

Employers have a duty to provide a safe workplace

13

Watt v Hertfordshire County Council

Fire service - jack fell off engine

The value to society of D's activity will be taken into account. Claims have a higher chance of success where defendant's alleged breach was for commercial interests rather than for the public interest.

14

Fardon v Harcourt-Rivington

Dog - Car window - "fantastic possibilities"

A defendant must guard against reasonable, not fantastic possibilities.

15

Mansfield v Weetabix

Unforeseen medical emergency while driving

If D is unaware of a medical condition and becomes impaired while driving, he will not be in breach of his duty of care.

16

Scott v London and St Katherine Docs Co

Res Ipsa Loquitor

Where C is unable to prove that D was negligent by relying on witnesses and expert witnesses, may be able to rely on RIL:

- The thing causing the damage is under control of D or someone for whom D is responsible
- The accident must be such as wouldn't normally happen without negligence.
- The cause of the accident is unknown to C.

D must then produce evidence showing how accident occurred and not due to negligence, failing that, that he used reasonable care at all times.

17

Re Herald of Free Enterprise

A judge can overturn the defence of common practice if it appears unreasonable.