Voluntary assumption of risk- nettleship v western
C had full knowledge of nature and extent of the risk- consented to accept the risk of being injured
1 of 10
Voluntary assumption of risk- Dann/Morris
Dann v Hamilton- Knew D had been drinking- however could not be said knowledge of risk was sufficient consent when driving/ Morris- drunkness of pilot so extream C accepted risk
2 of 10
Voluntary assumption of risk- rescuers
Haynes v harwood- policeman acted under compulsion and did not willingly accept risk: Not voluntary if : Acting to rescue, under legal/social or moral duty, conduct reasonable and natural
3 of 10
Illegality
Pitts v Hunt- impossible to determine standard of care and so will fail
4 of 10
Contributory Negligence facts
Carelessness on C's part &cont to negligence....Measured against reasonable person....Law reform cont neg- C's damages reduced...Reeves 50% blameworthy= 50% reduction
5 of 10
Cont Negligence- cases
Froom v Butcher- failing to wear seatbelt....Owens v Brimmell- self induced intox- cannot be excuse by C for failing to take care of himself
6 of 10
Children cont neg
Gough v Thorne- only find child guilty if such an age to reasonably be expected to take precaustions
7 of 10
Rescuers cont neg
judged by standard of reasonable rescuer
8 of 10
dilemma rule- cont neg
Jones v Boyce- in agony of the moment- actions reasoanble response to danger
9 of 10
Contribution b/w tortfeasors
Up to D to prove. C allowed to sue any of them and recover full damages
10 of 10
Other cards in this set
Card 2
Front
Voluntary assumption of risk- Dann/Morris
Back
Dann v Hamilton- Knew D had been drinking- however could not be said knowledge of risk was sufficient consent when driving/ Morris- drunkness of pilot so extream C accepted risk
Comments
No comments have yet been made