Breach of duty of care
- Created by: Michaela
- Created on: 30-01-13 00:00
View mindmap
- Breaching duty of care
- "Reasonable person" test is objective, defendants actions are measured against the standard of the reasonable person (objective) and not against his own personal standards (subjective). Not a defence for defendant o say he was doing his best, best is below what the reasonable person would have done.
- E.g. In Nettleship V Weston (1971), learner driver was held liable when she caused an accident, driving was not up to standard of reasonable qualified driver, though the court accepted that she had been driving to the best of her ability. Decision may seem harsh, given that all drivers are begginers at some point and that the defendant could do no more than she did but its the right decision which ensures that the claimant was not left without compensation just because he had the bad luck to be injured by a learner.
- Once Claimant has established that a duty of care exsists, must go on to show that the defendant has breached the duty
- Court will use the "reasonable person" test: did the defendants actions fall below those of the reasonable person in the same circumstances
- If the defendant did act as a reasonable person would have done, not liable even though the cliamant has suffered an injury or a loss
- "Reasonable person" test is objective, defendants actions are measured against the standard of the reasonable person (objective) and not against his own personal standards (subjective). Not a defence for defendant o say he was doing his best, best is below what the reasonable person would have done.
Comments
No comments have yet been made