Tort Law Flashcards
Explain Donoghue v Stevenson. What year was the case heard?
1932 ‘Snail in the bottle’ case Claimant had a ginger beer in a cafe, but it contained a decomposed snail She fell ill as a result, and later sued the manufacturer of the beer for negligence Landmark case as it established that manufacturers DO have a duty of care to their customers
Explain Chittock v Woodbridge School. What year was the case heard?
2002 Claimant was a 17 year old boy, who was on a school skiing trip He went off-piste twice, and was warned by teachers not to do so He did it again, and then broke his back Claimant’s family said that the school had a duty of care and should have banned him from skiing, but the court felt that because he was 17, he was old enough to know better and the school were therefore not negligible
Explain Bolton v Stone. What year was the case heard?
1951 Claimant was hit by a cricket ball hit out of a nearby ground House of Lords said that there was no negligence, because the ball had very rarely been hit out of the ground in recent years The cricket club should not have to take precautions against such remote risks
Explain Nettleship v Weston. What year was the case heard?
1971 Defendant was being taught to drive by the claimant Defendant caused an accident which led to claimant’s injury Defendant said that her inexperience was to blame and she should be made to fit to a lower standard than passed drivers Court judged that learner drivers owe the same duty of care and should meet the same standard as all drivers, otherwise it would create a flood of cases. Junior doctors should not be able to get away with lower standard of care
Explain Smith v Leech Brain & Co. What year was the case heard?
1962 Claimant worked as a galvaniser; one of his jobs was to lift articles into a tank of molten metal One day he got burned on the lip by a spatter as of molten metal The burn acted as a promoting agent for cancer, and he died 3 years later as a result Judge found that it was irrelevant that he had a predisposition to cancer; tortfeasor was liable for all damage sustained as a result of his negligence
Explain Knightly v Johns. What year was the case heard?
1982 Defendant’s negligent driving caused an accident in a tunnel Claimant arrived with other police officers, and was instructed by senior officer to close the other end of the tunnel, as he had himself forgotten to close the end they entered Claimant drove on the wrong side of the road, and was hit in the process sustaining serious injuries Defendant was not liable because it was not foreseeable, and the senior officer’s negligence had broken the chain of causation Senior officer liable for the injury to claimant
Explain Hughes v Lord Advocate. What year was the case heard?
1963 Workmen put a tent over a manhole and placed paraffin lamps around the manhole to warn motorists Claimant, a young boy, came with another boy and tripped over one of the lamps, causing a fire which reached 30 feet Claimant was knocked into the manhole by the blast, sustaining serious burns Considered that it was foreseeable that children could walk past, and that the lamps could be foreseen to cause a dangerous fire
Explain Barnett v Chelsea & Kensington Hospital Management Commitee. What year was the case heard?
1968 Claimant went to A&E because he was suffering from stomach pains Sent away and told to call GP in the morning Died in the night from arsenic poisoning Not negligent because even if he had been seen, they would not have been able to save him in time
Explain Bolam v Friern Barnet Hospital Management Committee. What year was the case heard?
1957 Claimant was suffering from depression, and went for ECT to cure it He was not warned about the risks of being ECTed without muscle relaxant, because at the time doctors did not agree on whether the spasming was important to the treatment or not He woke up with a broken hip, and sued for negligence Trial brought two expert witnesses, and they both disagreed about the need for relaxant Because the doctor acted in accordance with a body of other doctors, he was considered to have met the standard of a reasonable doctor and was not negligent
Explain Paris v Stepney Borough Council. What year was the case heard?
1950 Claimant had only one eye because of a war injury, and worked as a garage hand for the defendant They were aware of his special characteristics but did not provide goggles He got a bit of metal in his working eye, which led to full blindness Defendant negligent in their duty of care to him
Explain Watt v Hertfordshire County Council. What year was the case heard?
1954 A woman got stuck under a lorry, and the fire service were called to bring a jack to the scene to release her Normal vehicle for jack was not available, so chief ordered firemen to fit it to another vehicle and keep hold of it on the journey Vehicle broke too quickly on way, and the jack dropped causing severe injuries to claimant’s leg Not considered negligent by judge because the need to take precautions was outweighed by the need to save a life
Explain Bourhill v Young. What year was the case heard?
1942 Defendant was driving too fast and was killed by collision with a car Claimant approached scene of the accident after defendant’s body was removed She later gave birth to a stillborn child, and claimed that the scene had caused her nervous shock It was judged that it was not foreseeable to the defendant that his speed would cause harm to the claimant, because there were no pedestrians and she was not in sight
Explain Attia v British Gas. What year was the case heard?
1988 Claimant engaged the defendant to install central heating in her home She returned home to see her house on fire because of negligent employee She suffered nervous shock as a result Pre-trial said that this sort of case was actionable; you can sue as a secondary victim of injury to property as well as to loved ones
Explain Mattis v Pollock. What year was the case heard?
2003 Defendant employed a bouncer he knew to be violent to guard his nightclub Defendant encouraged bouncer to pass on to customers that he was prepared to use violence to ensure that they listened to instructions Bouncer assaulted the claimant’s friend, so claimant and others surrounded the bouncer and forced him to flee The bouncer went home, got a knife and returned, to stab the claimant, rendering him paraplegic The defendant was considered vicariously liable because the bouncer was acting in connection to his work: the situation was started during course of employment
Explain Page v Smith. What year was the case heard?
1995 Claimant was involved in a minor collision for which the defendant admitted responsibility Claimant suffered a recurrence of chronic fatigue syndrome of which he was in a remission It was judged to be foreseeable that the defendant’s actions could cause injury to the claimant, physical or psychological Defendant liable for all of the damage
