Study your flashcards anywhere!

Download the official Cram app for free >

  • Shuffle
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Alphabetize
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Front First
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Both Sides
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Read
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
Reading...
Front

How to study your flashcards.

Right/Left arrow keys: Navigate between flashcards.right arrow keyleft arrow key

Up/Down arrow keys: Flip the card between the front and back.down keyup key

H key: Show hint (3rd side).h key

A key: Read text to speech.a key

image

Play button

image

Play button

image

Progress

1/15

Click to flip

15 Cards in this Set

  • Front
  • Back
Novus Actus Interveniens
1. 3rd party act

2. Act of claimant


3. Act of nature

McKew v Holland and Hannen


Act of C - NAI

- C suffered a leg injury and later tried to descend a steep flight of stairs without assistance and fell

- D was not liable for second injuries as his actions were unreasonable

Wieland v Cyril Lord Carpets


Act of C - NAI


- C descended stairs shortly after collar fitted, injury sustained on last step


- D liable for further injury as C had not acted unreasonably

Corr v IBC Vehicles


Act of C


- C suffered physical injury and depression, then committed suicide


- D still liable for C's death as it was a direct result of the psychiatric injuries

Carslogie Steamship v Royal Norwegian Government


Act of Nature

- C's ship was damaged by D, C's owners put the ship to sea and it was damaged during a heavy storm


- The storm was foreseeable and acted as a novus actus


Knightley v Johns

3rd Party

- D4 sent C into a tunnel where an accident had happened, C crashed into D2 on a blind bend


- D1 was not liable, D4 was as his decision to send C in instead of around was a novus actus interveniens

Rouse v Squires


3rd Party


- D1 crashed his lorry and C was at the scene, another lorry didn't see the crash in time and also crashed causing C injuries


- Was reasonably foreseeable that another river may not be able to stop in time so D1 was still liable

Robinson v Post Office


3rd Party


Medical treatment which is performed in a non-negligent manner is unlikely to break the chin of causation

Webb v Barclays Bank


3rd Party


Negligent medical treatment may break the chain of causation if it is 'so gross as to break the chain of causation'

Lamb v Camden


3rd Party


- D fractured a waterpipe outside C's house causing them to vacate, one year later the council still hadn't done the repairs and squatters had moved in and done further damage


- Damage caused by squatters did break the chain as it was not foreseeable

Stansbie v Troman


3rd Party


- D was alone in C's house decorating, he left to get more wallpaper and failed to lock up, a thief broke in and stole property


- Thief did not break chain, D was under a duty to lock up

Intervening Rescue Attempt


3rd Party


Does D owe a duty of care to a rescuer?


1. Is it reasonably foreseeable that a rescue will be attempted?


2. Is there a relationship of proximity between D and the rescuer?


3. Is it fair, just and reasonable to impose a duty?


Wagner v International Railway


3rd Party


- C went to rescue his cousin who had fallen out of a train and ended up falling and sustaining injuries himself


- Rescue is foreseeable, 'danger invites rescue'

Tolley v Carr


3rd Party


- C tried to move a crashed vehicle out of the way of oncoming traffic, 2 vehicles crashed into him causing serious injuries


- The greater the risk to others he is trying to avert, the greater the imperilment to his safety the will accept as reasonable


-Burden of proof on D to show C was foolhardy

Baker v T E Hopkins


3 Party


- C went down a well to rescue 2 people, all 3 died


- D tried to use volenti non fit injuria as a defence


- Court held D was liable, C's actions were foreseeable in the circumstances