The flashcards below were created by user
on FreezingBlue Flashcards.
What is the general prinicple for omissions?
There is no liability (except in exceptional circumstances & where a positive duty exists)
What is the ratio of Donoghue v Stevenson?
That there is a general duty to avoid acts or omissions that might harm your neighbour (though no liability for omissions in pratice except where a positive duty exists)
There is a principle that the police do not owe a duty of care to any particular individual, rather to the public at large - case?
Hill v Chief Constable of West Yorkshire
What did the HoL rule in the case of Hill in relation to the duty of care police owed to the victim?
That a duty only exists where there is close proximity between the claimant and defendant.
On what basis was the case of Osman denied considering there was a close proximity between the defendant and the claimant?
On the 3rd part of the Caparo test - that it is fair, just and reasonable for a duty of care to exist - the public policy "escape clause"
What are the 3 parts of the Caparo test to establiush a new duty of care scenario?
- 1 - Forseeability of harm
- 2 - Proximity of relationship
- 3 - That it is fair, just and reasonable for the duty to be established
Why might the court oppose establishing a duty of care for omission against a public body?
- Over-defensive procedures
- Money wasted defending claims
- Existence of alternative compensation for victims
What was the ECHR issue in relation to the court's ruling in Osman?
It could be seen to provide police with a blanket immunity from prosecution which would be against Art 6 of the convention relating to the right to a fair trial.
In what case did the court find the police DID owe a duty of care to the victim if a crime?
Case of Swinney - which established a duty of care to informers (this is good public police and a proximit relationship)
The omission to do something or not to something which the reasonable person would nor would not do based on the considerations which reguate normal human conduct.
Name a case in which a duty of care was imposed against the emergency services (ambulance)?
Kent v Griffiths - CoA found that the facts of the case fitted with the Caparo requirements and a duty was established.
Name a case against the emergency services (fire), was not imposed, and why?
Capital Counties v Hampshire County Council - found no duty owed relating to operational matters
Name a case relating to the duty owed by local authorities and omissions to act?
Stovin v Wise - statutory power does not mean a common law duty is exercised.
A minor is represented in negligence cases by whom?
A litigation friend.
What must a claimant prove in a case of negligence and what is the burden of proof?
- Must prove:
- Duty of Care is owed (Caparo test)
- Duty of care was breached (reasonableness test, objective)
- Breach caused the harm (which is not too remote)
Burden on the claimant on the balance of probabilities.
Name a case establishing a duty owed by adults in loco-parentis.
Lewis v Carmarthenshire
Name a case establishing a duty owed by participants in sporting events to other participants.
Condon v Basi
Name a case regarding children, breach and the standard of the reasonable child.
Mullin v Richards
In breach the forseeability of injury is important but not the what?
Extent of the injury - re the Egg-shell Skull rule - and taking the victim as found.
In breach what are some considertaions as to whether a breach of a duty of care has occured?
- Standard of the reasonable x
- Foreseeability of the type of injury
- Likelihood of injury
- Social utility of the defendant's action
- Ease of precautions
Name a case relating to likelihood of injury.
Paris v Stepney - reasonable ignorance of a disability may be a defence
Name a case in relation to the social utility of a defendant's action/s?
Watt v Hertfordshire - risk must be balanced with the ends being achieved.
Name a case around the ease of precautions?
Latimer v AEC - taking all reasonable precautions
An intentional act which causes a person to reasonably apprehend the direct and immediate infliction of unlawful force upon his person.
The intentional infliction of unlawful force on another person.
What case riased the concept of 'socially unacceptable touching'
Wilson v Pringle
What case defined that the intent of the action was important not the intent of th consequence?
Wilson v Pringle
Which tort was established around the issue of intentional psychiatric harm which caused physical harm?
Wilkinson v Downton - the terrorism tort?
Is force acceptable in self-defence?
Yes - if it is reasonable and proportionate.
Which case defined the principle of proportionate and reasonable force in self-defence?
Lane v Holloway