also mention in bourhill v young, that the court stated that the harm was not foreseeable as she brought herself in the area of danger (not a primary victim) thus it was not fair, just and reasonable to impose a duty. In fact this is a good case that outlines the Caparo test.
Nettleship v Weston: any reasonable "competent" driver
"Bolam": If it meets standard of a "responsible body of medical opinion"
Also mention that "take your victim as you find him" is the thin skull rule
Comments
Report
Report