(Caparo test) reasonable foresight of harm to the particular claimant
1 of 6
Palmer v Tees HA
Sufficient proximity of relationship between the claimant and defendant
2 of 6
Stovin v Wise
No liability for omission
3 of 6
Home Office v Dorset Yacht Co Ltd
Exception where there is a duty to act positively, a person has some sort of power or control over another
4 of 6
Carmarthenshire County Council v Lewis
No omission care, Duty to act postively can arise where the defendant is in position of power or control over another
5 of 6
Bolam v Friern
The skilled defendant, not in breach if acting in accordance with such a practice, merely because there is a body of opinion which takes a contrary view
6 of 6
Other cards in this set
Card 2
Front
Sufficient proximity of relationship between the claimant and defendant
Back
Palmer v Tees HA
Card 3
Front
No liability for omission
Back
Card 4
Front
Exception where there is a duty to act positively, a person has some sort of power or control over another
Back
Card 5
Front
No omission care, Duty to act postively can arise where the defendant is in position of power or control over another
Comments
No comments have yet been made