Negligence

Donoghue v Stevenson- the case that started it all 

• claiment (D) went with friend to cafe
• friend bought a bottle of ginger beer
• pouring again into a class and a snail dropped out
• shes developed gastroenteritis and nervous shock
• got compensation from ginger beer manafacture 

Capro industries-plc v Dickman

• incremental approach- ask 3 questions
  
• IS HARM REASONABLY FORESEEABLE?
• IS THERE SUFFICIENT PROXIMITY BETWEEN THE CLAIMANT AND THE DEFENDANT, IN TIME, SPACE OR RELATIONSHIP?
• IS IT FAIR JUST AND REASONABLE TO IMPOSE A DUTY OF CARE?

Answers all yes- duty of care is established.Lost was due to the breach of duty and that such a loss was reasonably foreseable (not too remote) 

Is harm reasonably foreseable?

Kent v Griffiths

• doctor called for ambulance 
• patient suffering serve asthma attack ( need take to hospital immediatley)
• ambulance fail to arrive on time (no good reason for delay)
• patient suffered an heart attack- wouldn't of occured if amubulance arrived on time
• reasonably foreseable that the claiment would suffer some harm from delay.

Is there sufficient proximity between the claimant and the defendant,in time,space or relationship?

Bourhill v Young

• claiment was moving from a tram
• heard motor accident
• saw blood later on road but didn't witness the accident
• suffered nervous shock and had a miscarriage 
• reasonably foreseable that some people would suffer harm as a result of the defendants negligent driving 
• she was not part of the accident (only heard and not see)
• her actions failed

Is it fair just and reasonable to impose a duty of care?

Hill v Chief constable of W. Yorks

• claiment was the mother of the last murder
• victim of the Yorkshire Ripper (killed prostitutes)
• claim against the chief constable 
• police have been negligent in thier detection 
• no duty of care was owned by the police in the detection of crime

Blyth v Birmingham waterworks

• defendant installed water mains
• leak in a house, rsult of exceeding cold temperature 
• caused water damage to the house
• negligence did not occur due to not being reasonably foreseable.

Nettleship v Weston

• learner driver
• failed to turn wheel and caused Mr Nettleship fracture to his knee
• defendant argued that the standard of care should be low for learners
• he got in car knowing she was a learner- aware of the risk 

Bolam v Friern Hospital

• mental illness guy who went to threapy treatment
• doctor did not give relaxant drugs 
• claiment suffered a serious fracture 
• claiment argued that the doctor was in breach of duty by nor using the drug
• doctor was not in breach of duty
• doctor followed instructions therefore was not in the wrong 

Bolton v Stone 

• During a cricket match a ball hit a person (standing outside her house)
• Probability of this happening was really small
• Cricket club did not brake the duty of care as it had reached the appropriate standard of care 
• club had clearly thought about the risk and provided reasonable solution 

Paris v Stephy BC

• a guy was sighted from one eye
• emplyer did not provide the employer with goggles
• even though he was blind from one eye
• breach of duty as emplyer didn't provide the goggles
• due to the injury he was completed blind (both eyes)
• the duty was owned

Latimer V AEC Ltd 

• factory flooded after rainstorm
• water mixed with oil which meant that the floors were slippy
• warning signs around 
• claiment slipped and injuried 
• defendant owed a duty of care to employers
• did not break duty as all reasonable practical precautions had been taken 

Watt V Herefordshire CC

• claiment was a fireman
• a women was involved in a accident 
• needed to carry gear however there was not an appropriate transport for it to carry it
• chief firemen ordered to use a truck to carry the heavy gear
• the gear was not secure
• when the truck braked the gear fell and caused server injury to claiment
• firefighters took risk to save a life
• no breach of duty
• due to emergancy the gear did not need to be secure