Negligence

Card Set Information

Author:
Posie
ID:
86124
Filename:
Negligence
Updated:
2011-05-16 14:29:49
Tags:
Law
Folders:

Description:
Flash cards for AS/A2 Law - Negligence
Show Answers:

Home > Flashcards > Print Preview

The flashcards below were created by user Posie on FreezingBlue Flashcards. What would you like to do?


  1. What is negligence?
    Negligence is an accidental act or omission that causes forseeable harm.
  2. In negligence, who is the burden of proof on to prove duty of care?
    The claimant
  3. In which case was duty of care established?
    Donoghue v Stevenson
  4. Name the three things which the claimant must prove in order to establish a duty of care.
    • 1. Forseeability
    • 2. Proximity
    • 3. Is it just, fair and reasonable to impose a duty of care on the defendant.
  5. Name the forseeability case.
    Bourhill v Young
  6. Name the five things needed to prove special relationship under proximity.
    • 1. Does the defendant have specialist skill or knowledge?
    • 2. Does the claimant rely on the defendant?
    • 3. Does the defendant know of the reliance?
    • 4. Does the defendant assume responsibility towards the claimant?
    • 5. Is it reasonable for the claimant to rely on the defendant?
  7. Does the duty of care extend to rescuers?
    Yes - Videan
  8. Under breach, what standard must the defendant reach?
    That of the "Reasonable Man"
  9. Name the "reasonable professional" case
    Bolam v Friern HMC
  10. Name the "reasonable driver" case
    Nettleship v Weston
  11. Children under breach take...
    Less care - Mullin v Richards
  12. Name the four most common risk factors
    • 1. Degree of risk
    • 2. Cost and practicality of precautions
    • 3. Potential seriousness of harm
    • 4. Social utility
  13. Name the degree of risk case
    Bolton v Stone
  14. Name the cost and practicality of precautions case
    Latimer v AEC
  15. Name the potential seriousness of harm case
    Paris v Stepney BC
  16. Name the social utility case
    Watt v Hert CC
  17. What must the claimant prove in relation to causation?
    The chain of causation
  18. Name the two types of causation
    • 1. Causation in FACT
    • 2. Causation in LAW
  19. Explain causation in fact with the case
    • The "But for" test
    • Barnett v Chelsea HMC
  20. Explain causation in law with the case
    • The "Remoteness Rule"
    • The damage must not be too remote a consequence of the defendant's negligent act
    • Wagon Mound No1
    • Jolley v Sutton
  21. Name the exceptions which break the chain of causation
    • 1. Egg shell skull rule
    • 2. Novus Actus Interveniens
  22. Explain the egg shell skull rule with the case
    • "Take your victim as you find him"
    • Vulnerable claimant + unforseeable damage = LIABLE
    • Smith v Leech Brain
    • Page v Smith
  23. Explain Novus Actus Interveniens with the case
    • Intervening acts can break the chain of causation
    • Knightly v Johns
  24. Why is Res Ipsa Loquiter used?
    • When the claimant cannot say what happened but it is obvious that damage has occured, the burden of proof switches to the defendant.
    • Byrne v Boadle

What would you like to do?

Home > Flashcards > Print Preview