DUTY OF CARE
- Created by: ElleW88
- Created on: 10-12-19 17:02
View mindmap
- Negligence : Duty of Care
- Caparo v Dickman: Three stage Test
- 1. Reasonably Foreseeable
- 2. Relationship of Proximity
- 3. Fair, just and reasonable
- 2. Relationship of Proximity
- 1. Reasonably Foreseeable
- Economic Loss
- Pure economic loss
- Murphy v Brentwood DC 1991
- Hedley Byrne v Heller 1964
- Negligent Misstatment
- 1. Special relationship of trust and confidence between the parties.
- 2. The party preparing the advice/info has voluntarily assumed the risk (expressed or implied)
- 3. Has be reliance on the advice/information by the other parties.
- 4. the reliance was reasonable in the circumstances
- Caparo v Dickman 1990
- Smith v Eric S. Bush 1990
- 4. the reliance was reasonable in the circumstances
- Customs & Excise Commissions v Barclays Bank 2006
- 3. Has be reliance on the advice/information by the other parties.
- Esso Petroleum v Mardon 1976
- 2. The party preparing the advice/info has voluntarily assumed the risk (expressed or implied)
- Pure economic loss
- Psychiatric Harm
- Primary Victims
- Page v Smith 1996
- Rothwell v Chemical & Insulating Co Ltd 2008
- Grieves v FT Everard &Sons 2007
- Secondary Victims
- McLoughlin v O'Brian 1982
- Proximity of space and time
- Galli-Atkinson v Seghal 2003
- Sion v Hampstead Health Authority 1994
- North Glamorgan NHS Trust v Walters 2002
- Proximity of space and time
- Alcock v Chief Constable of S. Yorks
- Proximity of Relationship
- McFarlane v E.E. Caledonia 1992
- Alcock v Chief Constable of S. Yorks
- Proximity of space and time
- Galli-Atkinson v Seghal 2003
- Sion v Hampstead Health Authority 1994
- North Glamorgan NHS Trust v Walters 2002
- Messengers
- AB v Tamside & Glossop Health Authority 1996
- Farrel v Avon Health Authority 2001
- Rescuers
- White v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police 1998
- Occupational Stress
- Walker v Northumberland County Council 1995
- Hatton v Sutherland 2001
- Barber v Somerset County Council 2004
- McLoughlin v O'Brian 1982
- Primary Victims
- Caparo v Dickman: Three stage Test
Comments
No comments have yet been made