Tort (LLB) - Breach of duty

HideShow resource information
Once a duty of care has been established, for a successful claim in negligence the claimant must prove that the defendant breached that duty. What case shows the standard of care that the defendant should have owed?
Blyth v Birmingham Waterworks Co
1 of 14
What standard of care does the defendant owe the claimant as discussed in Blyth?
The defendant owes the standard of care expected of a reasonable person. This is an objective test and therefore personal characteristics are not taken into consideration.
2 of 14
Alderson defined the standard of care in Blyth. What did he say?
That a person will fall below the standard of care expected of a reasonable person and therefore breach his duty of care if he does 'something which a prudent reasonable man would not do'.
3 of 14
There are various factors that affect the standard of care by either raising or lowering the standard. What are these factors?
1.Special characteristics of the defendant 2.Special characteristics of the claimant 3. Likelihood of injury/level of risk 4. Have all precautions been taken?/Cost of taking precautions 5. Social utility of d's conduct
4 of 14
1. Give a two cases for special characteristics of the defendant where they have a lack of skill.
Wells v Cooper - In this case the defendant doing a DIY job, was judged against the reasonable person doing a DIY job. Nettleship v Weston - the defendant was a learner driver. The c was judged against the standard of a reasonably competent driver.
5 of 14
What if the defendant is a child? What standard of care do they owe? Give a case example.
Where the d is a child they are expected to reach standard of care reasonably expected of ordinary children of the same age - Mullin v Richards
6 of 14
What if the defendant is a competitor or spectator in a sporting event? Give a case example.
Spectators and competitors in sporting events may be owed a lower standard of care than the general standard - Wooldridge v Sumner
7 of 14
What if the defendant is a specialist in their field? Give two case examples that contrast eachother.
Bolam v Frienern Hospital Management Committee (The standard of a professional is judged by the standard of the profession - Bolam Test) & Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority (The Bolitho Rule)
8 of 14
Discuss the Bolum rule in more detail.
The Bolam rule states that if the defendant acted in accordance with the standard of care expected by the body of professionals, then they did not fall below the standard of care and breach their duty.
9 of 14
Discuss the Bolitho rule in more detail.
The Bolitho rlule states that even if the defendant complied with the standard practice accepted within that profession, if the courts decide to reject this as it is not deemed logical then the defendant will fall below the standard of care.
10 of 14
2. Characteristics of the claimant - The reasonable man should take more care when the situation demands it. What two cases show this?
Paris v Stepney Borough Council (blind in one eye and D didn't provide goggles) & Walker v Northumberland County Council (D knew C suffered from stress and didn't alter work load when the C returned to work from suffering from stress)
11 of 14
3. Likelihood of injury/ level of risk - The more likely D’s conduct is to lead to injury the more inclined to find breach occurred. What three cases shows this?
HayleyvLondon Electricity Board(Harm is statistically likely to occur you must protect against it) &BoltonvStone(cricket balls hit over fence 6 times in 30 years = not so likely harm will happen)&MillervJackson(8/9 cricket balls a year = more likely)
12 of 14
4. Closely linked to the level/size of the risk is whether all precautions have been taken. What case illustrates this element?
Latmir v AEC - The reasonable man will do all he can to prevent injury to others. Even in events where injury still occurs, so long as the defendant does all that is reasonable in the circumstances to mitigate harm, then there will be no breach.
13 of 14
5. Finally, what are the benefits of taking the risk? This element refers to utility and may therefore lower the standard of care. What case illustrates this?
Watt v Hertforshire County Council - In this case, the benefit of saving a woman's life outweighed the taking of the risk which injured the fire fighter. The standard of care will be lowered in such a case.
14 of 14

Other cards in this set

Card 2

Front

What standard of care does the defendant owe the claimant as discussed in Blyth?

Back

The defendant owes the standard of care expected of a reasonable person. This is an objective test and therefore personal characteristics are not taken into consideration.

Card 3

Front

Alderson defined the standard of care in Blyth. What did he say?

Back

Preview of the front of card 3

Card 4

Front

There are various factors that affect the standard of care by either raising or lowering the standard. What are these factors?

Back

Preview of the front of card 4

Card 5

Front

1. Give a two cases for special characteristics of the defendant where they have a lack of skill.

Back

Preview of the front of card 5
View more cards

Comments

No comments have yet been made

Similar Law resources:

See all Law resources »See all Tort resources »