Use LEFT and RIGHT arrow keys to navigate between flashcards;
Use UP and DOWN arrow keys to flip the card;
H to show hint;
A reads text to speech;
13 Cards in this Set
- Front
- Back
|
Establishing DoC |
Caparo v Dickman: Traditional Category and novel situations tests. Allows flexibility in Tort Law |
|
|
Traditional Categories |
Pre-established precedent: Examples: Donoghue v Steven - manufacturer and consumer Bolam v Friern Hospital Management Committee - doctor and patient Driver and passenger/roaduser Nettleship v Weston |
|
|
Novel situations |
Foreseeability Proximity and Just fair and reasonable |
|
|
Foreseeability |
Reasonably foreseeable in regards to all circumstances |
|
|
Haley v London Electricity Board |
Defendant could have foreseen a class of people - for example, on this case was blind people who could potential fall into the trench they dug. |
|
|
Roe v Minister of Health |
Considers circumstances Micro-cracks, at the time, indiscoverable or unknown in Science. Was unforeseeable. |
|
|
Proximity |
Is a matter of relationship. Stradhar v NREC: “a matter of control and responsibility over a dangerous situation” |
|
|
Goodwill v British Pregnancy Advisory Service |
The vasectomy was not known to the doctor to be for the benefit of the claimant’s partner. Insufficient proximity. |
|
|
Bourhill v Young |
Getting of the tram, a woman heard a motorcycle accident. Witnessed the aftermath and suffered shocking, prematurely giving birth. Defendant owed no proximity. |
|
|
Just, Fair and Reasonable |
MacFarlane v Tayside Health Authority Darnley v Croydon Health Services NHS Trust |
|
|
McFarlane v Tayside Health Authority |
D’s negligence lead to C giving unintended birth to a healthy child. She sued for the cost of raising a child. Held: unfair to impose that duty. A healthy baby child is considered a blessing. |
|
|
Darnley v Croydon Health Services NHS Trust [2018] UKSC 50 |
Unfair to impose an absolutely duty onto the Accidents and Emergencies Reception to provide accurate and precise waiting times. |
|
|
Duty to Rescuers: Haynes v Harwood |
Defendant owes a duty of care where his negligence creates a situation dangerous enough, that rescuers coming to aid are foreseeable. D will be liable to such rescuers as well. |
