tort_flashcards_set2
(13 cards)
What was established in Stapley v Gypsum Mines Ltd [1953]?
Contributory negligence applies where the claimant’s own failure to exercise reasonable care significantly contributes to their injury or loss.
What principle was defined in Bolam v Friern Hospital Management Committee [1957]?
The standard of care for medical professionals is judged against standards accepted by a responsible body of practitioners skilled in the relevant medical field.
What did Wells v Cooper [1958] hold regarding non-professional individuals?
Laypersons conducting tasks requiring some level of skill or expertise are judged by the standard of a reasonably competent amateur rather than a professional.
What legal test was clarified in The Wagon Mound (No. 1) [1961]?
The legal test for remoteness of damage, limiting negligence liability to harms that are reasonably foreseeable.
What was established in Halsey v Esso Petroleum [1961]?
Actionable nuisance includes substantial interference with residents’ comfort and property enjoyment through noise and environmental pollution.
What test for causation was established in Barnett v Chelsea & Kensington Hospital [1969]?
The ‘but-for’ test for causation, confirming negligence liability requires a direct causal link between negligence and resulting harm.
What principle was confirmed in Morris v Murray [1991]?
The volenti non fit injuria principle, holding no liability arises if the claimant voluntarily accepts known and obvious risks.
What criteria for secondary victims were established in Alcock v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire [1991]?
Stringent criteria for secondary victims claiming psychiatric harm, including necessary proximity, direct perception of events, and closeness of relationship to primary victims.
What three-stage test for duty of care was established in Caparo Industries plc v Dickman [1990]?
Foreseeability of harm, proximity between parties, and the fairness of imposing such a duty.
What did White v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire [1999] hold regarding rescuers?
Rescuers must meet secondary victim criteria, such as direct involvement or imminent physical danger, to successfully claim psychiatric harm.
What did Gray v Thames Trains [2009] hold regarding criminal actions?
The illegality defence (ex turpi causa) bars compensation claims for harm resulting from the claimant’s own criminal actions.
What was clarified in Covenant v Lawrence [2014] regarding noise pollution?
Noise disturbances constitute actionable nuisance when they substantially and significantly interfere with reasonable property enjoyment.
What duty was examined in Montgomery v Lanarkshire Health Board [2015]?
Medical professionals must comprehensively inform patients of material risks and available alternatives, emphasizing patient autonomy and informed consent.
