Law Unit 2 Tort Cases

HideShow resource information
Donoghue v Stevenson
Neighbour Principle: Snail in ginger beer. Set out the original rules for negligence.
1 of 26
Caparo v Dickman
Duty of Care: Three Stage Test set out. Foresight of harm; proximity and fair, just and reasonable.
2 of 26
Kent v Griffiths
Foreseeability of Harm: That an ambulance being late could cause further injuries to a patient.
3 of 26
Bourhill v Young
Proximity: Woman walked over to motorcycle accident and went in premature labour because of this, giving birth to stillborn. There wasn't proximity as she walked there.
4 of 26
Hill v Chief Constable of West Yorkshire
Fair, Just and Reasonable: It wasn't to impose a duty of care on the police to an individual, as they only have a duty of care to the public.
5 of 26
Blyth v Birmingham Waterworks
Negligence: Pipe exploded due to unforeseen weather, which flooded the claimant's house. Not foreseen, so they weren't liable.
6 of 26
Roe v Minister of Health
Forseeability: 2 claimants were paralyzed after their anaesthetic was contaminated. It wasn't known that this could happen, so it wasn't foreseeable.
7 of 26
Latimer v AEC
Reasonable: D slipped at factory, even though signs had been put up and sawdust put on the floor. They had taken enough precautions, so weren't liable.
8 of 26
Nettleship v Weston
Reasonable Person: D crashed car in driving lesson. Learner drivers will be treated as qualified drivers.
9 of 26
Wells v Cooper
Reasonable Person: Those with a skill even if doing DIY will be judged at the standard of the reasonably competent person exercising that skill
10 of 26
Mullins v Richards
Reasonable Man: Two teenagers were playing with rulers, when a splinter went into one of their eyes. A teenager will be judged at the standard of a reasonable teenager.
11 of 26
R v Bolam
Reasonable Man: Claimant got a fracture because they hadn't been given muscle relaxant for ECT. Will not be negligent if there is a body of reasonable doctors who would have done as they did even if other doctors would not have done so.
12 of 26
R v Bolitho
Pager battery was flat. Even if other doctors would have done as they did this does not guarantee the court will find they acted reasonably. The court has the final say on whether the actions were reasonable and logical.
13 of 26
Bolton v Stones
Risk Factors: Cricket ball hit person on head, this rarely happened.Low frequency of likelihood of incident means LOWER standard of care is acceptable
14 of 26
Paris v Stepney
Risk Factors: Man with one eye lost other eye because he wasn't given goggles at work. He was a vulnerable claimant so the duty of care had to be higher.
15 of 26
Watt v Hertfordshire
Risk Factors: Fireman had to bring jack to accident, they had to hold it, but it fell onto claimant's leg. In an emergency a risk may be justified which lowers the standard of care required
16 of 26
Scott v London & St. Katherine's Docks
Res ispa loquitur: Bag of sugar fell onto person's head. Three part test: under control of D, usually doesn’t happen unless someone is negligent, no other explanation then burden of proof moves onto defendant to show they were not negligent.
17 of 26
Mahon v Osborne
Res ipsa loquitur: Doctor left swab in patient who died, this was clearly negligent.
18 of 26
Barnett v Chelsea & Kensington Hospital
Factual Causation: Claimant had arsenic poisoning and doctor told him to come back next day. He would have died anyway, so the but for test wasn't acceptable.
19 of 26
Wagon Mound No.1
Remoteness: Oil came out of vessel, which combined with cotton debris and was set on fire by welding, causing a massive fire. Damage was foreseeable but the extent was far too remote, so not liable.
20 of 26
Hughes v Lord Advocate
Foreseeable: Boy accidently dropped a left paraffin lamp down manhole, which caused an explosion which left severe burns. It was foreseeable that there would be harm, it doesn't matter that the explosion was unforeseeable.
21 of 26
Fairchild v Glenhaven
Causation: Workers got cancer from asbestosis. Where there are several defendants liability may be divided between them – it only needs to be shown that one materially affected the Claimant, and that one could be fully liable
22 of 26
Smith v Littlewoods
Novus Actus Interveniens: Cinema owners not liable for vandals who started fire that spread to Claimant’s house
23 of 26
Knightley v Johns
Novus actus interveniens: Senior officer told policeman to go wrong way into tunnel and didn't close it after an accident. Police were liable for injuring their own police cyclist, not the defendant who caused accident.
24 of 26
Smith v Leech Brain
Thin Skull Rule: Man who had precancerous condition got molten metal splashed on lip which caused cancer that killed him. The defendants had to take their victim as they found him.
25 of 26
Jefford v Gee
Damages: Scooter / car accident – defendant ordered to pay damages plus interest. Interest is payable on both general and special damages from the time of the injury / loss up until the date of trial
26 of 26

Other cards in this set

Card 2

Front

Duty of Care: Three Stage Test set out. Foresight of harm; proximity and fair, just and reasonable.

Back

Caparo v Dickman

Card 3

Front

Foreseeability of Harm: That an ambulance being late could cause further injuries to a patient.

Back

Preview of the back of card 3

Card 4

Front

Proximity: Woman walked over to motorcycle accident and went in premature labour because of this, giving birth to stillborn. There wasn't proximity as she walked there.

Back

Preview of the back of card 4

Card 5

Front

Fair, Just and Reasonable: It wasn't to impose a duty of care on the police to an individual, as they only have a duty of care to the public.

Back

Preview of the back of card 5
View more cards

Comments

No comments have yet been made

Similar Law resources:

See all Law resources »See all Cases resources »