These affect a situation in which the reasonable man should adjust to:
1) vulnerable claimants: Paris v Stepney: a one eyed welder undertook some work where a shard of metal entered his eye and blinded him totally. His employer should've raised the standard of care and had failed to provide goggles. The damage was resulted by the breach.
2) magnitude/liklihood: Bolton v Stone: a cricket ground had put up 60ft fences. Balls had only escaped 6 times in 30 years. Therefore, the liklihood was low and there was no breach when the claimant had been hit on the head with a cricket ball.
3) cost of precautions: Latimer: a had flooded and sawdust was used to cover the entire area. An employee slipped over but there was no breach as the cost of precaution was financially proportionate.
4) social utility: Watt: a fireman was injured when lifting equipement. The standard of care was lower and there was no breach as the motive was for the greater good of society.
Comments
No comments have yet been made