donoghue v stevenson (1932)
Duty of care
- Donoghues friend bought drink of ginger beer.
- contents of drink contained decomposing snail.
- as she had not bought the drink she could not claim for her illness.
- however sued the manufacturers claiming they owed her a duty of care.
1 of 10
caparo v dickman (1990)
Duty of care
- because of this case the neighbour test was replaced by the 3-part test.
2 of 10
kent v griffiths (2000)
- doctor called for ambulance to take a patient suffering from serious asthma attack.
- ambulance failed to arrive within a reasonable time.
- patient suffered heart attack which could have been avoided if taken to hospital earlier.
- it was reasonably foreseeable the claimant would suffer harm with failure of ambulance arriving.
3 of 10
jolley v suttopn london borough council (2000)
- boy aged 14 was attempting to fix an abandoned boat.
- whilst doing this the boat slipped and paralysed him.
- the boat belonged to the council by a block of flats.
- the council knew it was dangerous and kids were likely to play on it.
- the injury to the claimant was reasonably foreseeable.
4 of 10
bourhill v young (1943)
- A motorcyclist going too fast crashed into a car and died.
- heavily pregnant woman (bourhill) was 50 yards away, did not hear the crash.
- later she saw the blood on the floor, went into shock and her baby was stillborn.
- she tried to claim but the motorcyclist did not owe her a duty of care as it wasn't foreseeable this would happen. however he did owe a duty of care to the driver of the car with whom he collided.
5 of 10
topp v london country bus (south west) ltd (1993)
- Driver left bus unattended with keys in the ignition.
- bus was stolen and driven dangerously causing an accident in which the claimant (topp) was injured.
- the damage was held not to be reasonably foreseeable.
6 of 10
hill v chief constable of south yorkshire (1990)
Proximity and Fair, just and reasonable
- a serial killer had been murdering women in Yorkshire area.
- claimants daughter was last victim.
- police had enough info to arrest killer before he killed the claimants daughter.
- mother claimed police owed duty of care.
- relationship between victim and police was not proximate enough for the police to be under a duty of care.
- police knew there might be a further victim but didn't know who the victim would be.
7 of 10
osman v ferguson (1993)
- police knew there was a risk of an attack on a schoolboy.
- the police had received complaints about the attackers behaviour.
- the boys farther was killed and the boy seriously injured.
- there was a proximate relation between police and victim and victims family.
- however case did not succeed as it was not seen as fair, just and reasonable to impose duty of care on the police.
8 of 10
capital & counties plc v hampshire county council
Fair, just and reasonable
- fire brigade attended scene of a fire.
- a fire officer ordered the sprinkler systems in the building to be turned off.
- causing fire to spread and more serious damage.
- it was seen as fair,just and reasonable to recognise a duty of care against the fire brigade.
9 of 10
Roe v minister of health (1954)
Breach of duty - degree of risk
- anaesthetic was kept in glass ampoule's. back then it was not known invisible cracks could occur in these glasses.
- so when the claimant was paralysed by contaminated anaesthetic which seeped through the glass, there was no breach.
10 of 10