Duty of care
Donoghue v Stevenson 1932
- Start of tort of negligence
- Drink bought by a friend, contained a dead snail, made the claimant ill.
- Could not claim under law of contract
- Sued manufactures claiming they owed her a duty of care
- Set out by House of Lords, showing who can owe a duty of care
Caparo 3 part test
- Replaced the neighbour test
- Under Caparo v Dickman 1990
- Was damage or harm reasonably foreseeable?
- Is there sufficiently proximate relationship between the claimant and the defendant?
- Fair just and reasonable to impose a duty?
Kent v Griffiths 2000
- Reasonably foreseeable, that claimant would suffer from the failure of an abulance to arrive within a reasonable time, with no satisfactory reason
Jolly v Sutton London Borough Council 2000
- Reasonably foreseeable that the 14 year old boy repairing a boat, that was in a dangerous condition would cause him harm.
Bourhill v Young 1943
- Pregnant lady, heard an accident but did not see it
- Saw blood on the road, suffered shock, lost baby
- Defendant not owe duty of care, not reasonably foreseeable that this could happen
Topp v London Country Bus South West Ltd 1993
- Bus left unattended with keys in ignition
- Stolen and caused an accident
- Held not reasonably foreseeable
Hill v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire 1990
- Serial killer had been murdering women
- Claimants daughter was last victim
- Thought that police should owe a duty of care, already had enough information to arrest killer
- Held by Lods that relationship was not sufficiently proximate.
- Police did not know who the next victim would be
Osman v Ferguson
- Police knew there was risk of an attack on a schoolboy, took no action
- Boy was injured
- Court held there was sufficient proximity
- BUT unfair to impose a duty on the police
Fair, Just and Reasonable
Hill v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire
- Imposing a duty on police, lead to lower standards of policing, defensive.
Capital v Countries plc v Hampshire County Council 1997
- If public services increase a risk that already exists, then courts more likely to hold it fair just and reasonable
- Fire officer ordered sprinkler system to be turned off. Fire spread and caused even more damage
- Fire brigade held a duty of care
Breach of Duty - Degree of risk
Roe v Minister of Health 1954
- If there is no risk, no breach
- not known that anaesthetic was contaminated
- Claimant became paralysed as a result, could not claim compensation
Bolten v Stone 1951
- Cricket ball hit a passer by in the street
- Small risk, only 6 times in 30 years had a ball gone over the fence
- risk small, no breach of duty
Haley v London Electricity Board 1965
- Road used by blind people