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;
14 Cards in this Set
- Front
- Back
|
Part A - Wells V Cooper |
- new handle -handle broke - c injured the standard of care required is of the reasonably competent person doing the job in question |
|
|
Part A - Bolam v Friern Barnet Hospital (1957) |
- c mental illness - ect - electric shock - broken pelvis the standard of a profession is judged by the standard of the profession |
|
|
Part A - Nettleship v Weston 1971 |
- driving lessons - hit lamppost- c injured D will be judged against the reasonable fully qualified job in question |
|
|
Part A - Mullin V Richards 1998 |
- 15 year old girls - ruler broke - c injured D will be judged against the standards of a reasonable person if that age |
|
|
Part A reasonable person |
duty of care is breached if the defendant falls below the standard of the reasonable man |
|
|
Part A |
- consider characteristics that stand out - discuss whether standards would or would not be altered |
|
|
Part B risk factors |
an additional risk factor that must be considered which could affect the standard of a reasonable man asks if all practical precautions have been taken (latimer v aec) |
|
|
Part B risk factors |
- special characteristics of claimant - size of the risk - public benefits of taking the risk - reasonable man cannot take precautions against the unknown risks therefore it is likely that (d) has/has not breached their duty of care to (c) |
|
|
1) special characteristics |
Dans v Stephney borough council 1931 - one eye - hammer - metal chip - blind council knew - standard of care higher - cost/effort small in comparison to risk duty breached |
|
|
2) size of the risk - greater risk more care |
Bolton v Stone 1933 - cricket ball - 6 x 30 years cricket club reached appropriate standard of care - not breached duty of care |
|
|
2) size of the risk |
hayley v london electricity board - dug trench / only warnings no barriers - blind people greater precautions should have been taken + d breached duty of care |
|
|
3) have all practical precautions been taken consider balance of the risk against cost/effort |
Latimer v AEC Ltd 1953 - factory - slippery floor - man slipped - evacuated no breach - only way to prevent - unreasonable expectations |
|
|
4) what happens if the risk is unknown cannot be breach if risk unknown |
- anaesthetic mixed with cleaning solution - c paralysed risk of contamination unknown - no breach |
|
|
5) what happens in an emergency situation emergency = greater risks taken - lower standard of care |
watt v hertfordshire county council - firefighters saving woman - legs crushed balance of rescuing the woman outweighed the risk of injury - duty not breached |
