Tort Law Cases

  • Created by: eloise
  • Created on: 01-06-16 10:22
Bourne Leisure v Marsden
Occupier's Liability. It was foreseeable that a child would wonder away from its parents and enter a pond so there was no need to warn.
1 of 96
Hudson v Ridge Manufacturing
Employer's Liability. Employer was liable for C's injury due to a practical joker who had not been dealt with. Competent Workforce.
2 of 96
McWilliams v Sir William Arrol
Employer's Liability. The employer was not liable for not providing a harness because the deceased would not have worn it anyway. Provide equipment.
3 of 96
Protects good Samaritans. Was the negligence a result of a heroic act?
4 of 96
Mersey Docks v Griffiths
Employers Liability. Even though the crane and driver were hired out, making the hirer the employer, the original employer was vicariously liable for the driver's negligence.
5 of 96
The Lister Test
Vicious liability; a wrongful act authorised by the employer.
6 of 96
N v Merseyside Police
No Vicarious liability. The assault by the police was 'on a frolic of his own'
7 of 96
Mr Mohamed v Morrisons
Vicarious liability. Employer liable for employee's assault on a customer who was entrusted to interact with customers. Close connection test.
8 of 96
White v South Yorkshire Police
Negligently inflicted Psychological Harm. Rescuers should receive no favourable treatment; they must prove they are primary victims.
9 of 96
Hunter v Canary Wharf
Private nuisance. The claimant must have proprietary interest to claim against dust from tower. Not a child/spouse/lodger. No right to claim for TV interference.
10 of 96
Jones v Portsmouth
Private nuisance. The defendant was liable for the trees sucking moisture from C's home despite no ownership. Had made contract with council to maintain them.
11 of 96
Southport v Esso
Private nuisance. An oil spill in an estuary cannot be O.L. it requires use of land
12 of 96
Smith v Scott
Private nuisance. The occupier authorised a family to live in a house but was not liable for the nuisance they caused because they did not authorise this.
13 of 96
Goldman v Hargrave
Private nuisance. D liable for not dousing a soldering tree which then caught fire to C's house.
14 of 96
Holdback Hall Hotel v Scarborough
Private nuisance. D could not be expected to stop huge landslide which made hotel fall into sea. Must look at resources available.
15 of 96
Southwark v Mills
Private nuisance. Use of land and interference must be unreasonable. D not liable for poor soundproofing meaning C could hear everyday uses of neighbour's home.
16 of 96
Sturges v Bridgman
Private nuisance. Sweet machine because a nuisance when a consultation room was built next door which changed the locality.
17 of 96
Hires Electrical v Park Ingredients
Private nuisance. More interference expected on industrial estates. The smell from an ingredients factory was not a nuisance as it was expected.
18 of 96
Wheeler v JJ Saunders
Private nuisance. D liable for nuisance of pig noise and smell despite planning permission. This does not authorise nuisance.
19 of 96
Watson v Croft Promo Sport
Private Nuisance. D liable for nuisance of racing noise despite planning permission; the are was still largely residential.
20 of 96
St Helens Smelting v Tipping
Private nuisance. Physical damage of trees meant D was liable for nuisance regardless of locality.
21 of 96
Miller v Jackson
Private Nuisance. There was no injunction granted for the cricket ground when C was hit by a ball because it was 70 years old and would be too much of a loss to society.
22 of 96
Dennis v Ministry of Defence
Private Nuisance. No injunction for noise of RAF training because it was in the public interest t continued. Damages can satisfy ECHR Art 8 private home.
23 of 96
Cambridge Water v Eastern Counties Leather
Private nuisance. D not liable for drops of solvent contaminating water supply because it was too remote and not foreseeable.
24 of 96
McFarlane v EE
. A mere bystander can be a secondary victim where the event was so shocking the ordinary man would suffer psychologically.
25 of 96
Collins v Wilcock
Trespass. Assault: causes C to reasonable apprehend the direct and immediate application of force. Battery: the application of force
26 of 96
Stephen v Myers
Assault. D was stopped before he could have hit C therefore was not an assault because C could not reasonable apprehend he would hit him with raised fist.
27 of 96
Thomas v NUM
Assault. The pickets were behind a fence so could not be reasonably apprehended to apply force. Public nuisance; right to use the highway.
28 of 96
Tuberville v Savage
Assault. Words can negative a gesture. 'if it weren't assizes time i would not take such language from you' whilst reaching for sword.
29 of 96
Read v Coker
Assault. A conditional threat is still assault where the condition does not nullify the actions. Saying they would break his neck if he didn't leave whilst ganging up around C with fists and rolled sleeves was still assault.
30 of 96
NHS v Walters
Negligently Inflicted Psychological Harm. The deterioration of her sons health due to negligent care was not sudden so not actionable.
31 of 96
Knightley v Johns
Causation. Officers instruction to drive to other end of tunnel broke chain of causation making him liable for the injury of the policeman and 3rd party when they crashed.
32 of 96
Smith v Leech Brain
Negligence: Remoteness of Damage: Eggshell Skull Rule. Employer liable for death of C's husband due to a burn triggering pre cancerous cells in his lip. D must take the C how he finds him.
33 of 96
Wainwright v Home Office
Negligently Inflicted Psychological Harm. Must be a recognised psychological condition.
34 of 96
Alcock v Yorkshire Police
Negligently Inflicted Psychological Harm. Hillsborough. Primary/secondary victims (close tie, unaided senses, proximity, sudden). Rescuers primary.
35 of 96
Greatorex v Greatorex
Negligently Inflicted Psychological Harm. Dad got PTSD after seeing injured son in crash. D not liable, primary victims do now owe a duty of care to secondary victims.
36 of 96
Youssoupoff v MGM
Defamation. A film character resembling C can be libel.
37 of 96
Manson v Tussauds
Defamation. A wax effigy can be libel
38 of 96
Berkoff v Burchill
Defamation. Calling someone ugly can be defamation where it opens an actor for example to ridicule
39 of 96
Defamation Act
defamation has caused or is likely to cause harm to a person's reputation
40 of 96
Tilley v Fry
Defamation. An innuendo can be defamatory where it is published to 1 or more people with special knowledge.
41 of 96
O'Shea v MGM
Defamation. Where D's photo resembles C but is in fact someone else, D is not liable.
42 of 96
Godfrey v Demon Internet
Defamation. D is liable if a comment is posted on their server and does not remove it.
43 of 96
Bunt v Tilley
Defamation. Internet provider not liable for comments on sites operated by other companies, too remote.
44 of 96
Wheat v Lacon
Occupiers Liability. The owner and licensee were both occupiers with a sufficient degree of control over the pub where no light in the stairs meant C's husband fell and died.
45 of 96
Occupiers Liability Act 1957
Legal visitors: invitees, licensees, right of law, pursuing a contract
46 of 96
Taylor v Glasgow Corporation
Occupiers Liability. Allurement principle. Child attracted to poison berries, ate them and died. Occupier liable for no fence or warning signs.
47 of 96
Jolly v Sutton
Occupiers Liability. D liable for not removing rotten boat, it was foreseeable that children would climb on it and get hurt.
48 of 96
Roles v Nathan
Occupiers Liability. D not liable to protect visitors from ordinary risks of their common calling. Chimney sweeps should have known carbon monoxide would kill them. Clear warnings meant D not liable.
49 of 96
Salmon v Seafarer Restaurants
Occupiers Liability. D liable for injury to fireman from negligently started chip pan fire. Firemen can claim for ordinary and exceptional risks.
50 of 96
White v Blackmore
Occupiers Liability. D liable for death of C's husband when hit by negligently set up rope. Despite signs warning of the dangerous racing, this did not exclude liability for the ropes.
51 of 96
Occupiers Liability Act 1984
Visitors other then 'his' visitors; trespassers
52 of 96
Revill v Newbury
Occupiers Liability. D liable for harm caused to trespassers by shooting them . Must protect from deliberate/reckless harm.
53 of 96
Ratliff v McConnel
Occupiers Liability. D not liable when C climbed over fence, ignoring signs saying the pool was closed, the shallow and deep end, diving in and breaking his neck. It was not due to the state of the property, the act was dangerous.
54 of 96
Scott v Shepherd
Causation. Despite people intersecting the lit firework, the original thrower was still liable for the claimant's injury
55 of 96
Bird v Jones
False Imprisonment. It must be total constraint. The partial closure of a bridge was not F.I. because the claimant could leave and use a different one.
56 of 96
Prison Officers v Iqbal
False Imprisonment. It requires an act not an omission. Failing to let the prisoners out of their cells was not F.I.
57 of 96
Cross v Kirkby
Self Defence. It must be reasonable and D was liable for hitting someone so hard it fractured their skull having been repeatedly hit more gently with a bat.
58 of 96
Mental Capacity Act
Consent to Medical Treatment for Incompetent adults. Medical treatment without consent is justified if necessary.
59 of 96
Children Act
Parents will consent to medical treatment for young children.
60 of 96
Family Reform Act
The age of consent is 16 or below only if the child has sufficient intelligence.
61 of 96
Limitation Act
6 years to bring action for assault. 3 for a breach of duty.
62 of 96
Wilkinson v Downton
Infliction of Psychological Harm. D called C saying her husband was injured in a crash as a joke. D was liable for C's nervous shock because it was intentionally done to cause harm.
63 of 96
Protection from harassment Act 1997
'code of conduct' means more then one incident
64 of 96
Levi v Bates
Harassment. D asked listeners to contact C's husband's house after a feud. C (wife) claimed in harassment. It need not be aimed at the claimant for them to bring action.
65 of 96
Haynes v Harwood
Negligence. An unattended horse bolted into a street, D was liable for creating a danger leaving it unattended. 'negligence in the air won't do'.
66 of 96
Donoghue v Stevenson
Negligence. Woman shocked by snail in her drink. Lord Atkins' Neighbour Principle
67 of 96
Duty of Care. Is there a relationship of proximity? is there any reason not to impose a duty of care?
68 of 96
Duty of Care. Was the harm foreseeable? is there a relationship of proximity? Is it fair, just and reasonable to impose a duty of care?
69 of 96
Wilsher v Essex
Duty of Care. A junior doctor gave a baby too much oxygen and it went to blind. This could have been because of the oxygen or 4 other causes. The junior doc owes same duty as an experienced one. liable even with multiple possible causes
70 of 96
Bolam v Friern Hospital
Duty of Care. Doctor did not give relaxant drugs and C's skull fractured. Not to be treated as if in breach because a body of professionals agreed with this practice. The Bolam test.
71 of 96
Byrne v Boadle
Breach of Duty. Res Ipsa Loquitur. No one saw what caused the barrel to fall but it was surmised that it was due to D's negligence.
72 of 96
Nettlesbip v Weston
Breach of Duty. Learner driver same duty as experienced driver. Hurt teacher in crash. Contributory negligence, knew the driver was a learner.
73 of 96
Roberts v Ramsbottom
Breach of Duty. The driver had a stroke but was still in breach; no account could be taken of his illness
74 of 96
Weetabix v Mansfield
Breach of Duty. Driver was unaware of his illness therefore was only expected to meet the standard of a driver with an illness they are unaware of which affects their ability to drive.
75 of 96
Birch v Paulson
Breach of Duty. There is no breach where a drunk runs out in front of the car too late to avoid him
76 of 96
Brown v Paterson
Breach of Duty. No breach where C turns in front of D and D does not breach the highway code.
77 of 96
Langley v Osmond
Breach of Duty. D liable for driving to fast over ice meaning the police in pursuit were harmed.
78 of 96
Marshall v Osmond
Breach of Duty. The police owe the save driving standard of care as other drivers.
79 of 96
Wagon Mound
Remoteness of Damage. Damage must be foreseeable. The ignition of a fire by a piece of cotton coming into contact was not foreseeable but was so serious that D was liable
80 of 96
Paris v Stepney
Seriousness of Damage. D liable for blindness of C who was already blind in 1 eye and was provided no goggles even though no others were.
81 of 96
Latimer v AEC
Preventative action. D was not liable for C's slip having taken reasonable steps to prevent it. Sawdust and signs after flood, not expected to shut the factory.
82 of 96
Barnett v Chelsea Hospital
Causation. D not liable for C's death of arsenic poisoning because even if he hadn't sent him home w/o examination, he could not have been saved. The 'But For' test.
83 of 96
Dorset Yacht Co v Home Office
Causation. D liable for damage to yacht by boys they were in control of.
84 of 96
Tomlinson v Congleton
Occupiers Liability. D not liable for C's broken neck after jumping in pond. Signs and Rangers made him a trespasser. No implied license under 1984 Act.
85 of 96
Donoghue v Folkstone Properties
Occupiers Liability. D not liable for C's injury jumping off pier at midnight in mid winter. Not foreseeable C would come into the vicinity of the danger.
86 of 96
Young v Kent
Occupiers Liability. D liable for child falling through brittle skylight which should have been replaced
87 of 96
Theatre v Richardson
Defamation. Publication must be natural and foreseeable. D liable for defamation because it was foreseeable that the recipient's wide would open the the letter.
88 of 96
Slipper v BBC
Defamation. D liable for republications of defamatory film as these were foreseeable.
89 of 96
Keown v NHS
Occupiers Liability. D not liable for child falling off fire escape because it was not due to the state of the property.
90 of 96
Lowery v Walker
Occupiers Liability. Implied licence where people used a field as a shortcut to the occupier's knowledge and they did not make and effort to stop it. Liable for harm to C by horse in the field.
91 of 96
Vaughan v Walker
Occupiers Liability. Objective test to find breach. D used best judgement that hay would not catch fire therefore not liable.
92 of 96
Page v Smith
Seriousness of Damage. Eggshell Skull Rule. D liable for triggering C's ME in car collision
93 of 96
Topp v London Buses
Negligence; Foreseeability. D not liable for thieves stealing bus and hitting woman.
94 of 96
Bolton v Stone
Nuisance; foreseeability. Too unlikely that C would be hit by ball with a fence and the ground was very far away therefore D not liable.
95 of 96
Hotson v Berkshire Health
Causation. D not liable for amputation of C's leg after incorrect diagnosis. There was a large chance he would develop the infection even with the correct diagnosis.
96 of 96

Other cards in this set

Card 2


Hudson v Ridge Manufacturing


Employer's Liability. Employer was liable for C's injury due to a practical joker who had not been dealt with. Competent Workforce.

Card 3


McWilliams v Sir William Arrol


Preview of the front of card 3

Card 4




Preview of the front of card 4

Card 5


Mersey Docks v Griffiths


Preview of the front of card 5
View more cards


No comments have yet been made

Similar Law resources:

See all Law resources »See all Tort resources »