Breach of Duty

• What are the three ways to establish a breach of duty?

  The reasonable person test, Res Ipsa Loquitur, and S11 Civil Evidence Act 1968
• What is the reasonable person test?

  • Asks, "What would a reasonable person have done?"
  • A reasonable person has no particular abilities
  • Key cases: Donoghue v Stevenson, Blyth v Birmingham Waterworks, Glasgow Corp v Muir
• How is the reasonable person test applied in court?

  The actions of the defendant are compared to what a hypothetical reasonable person would have done
• What is the significance of the case Hazell v British Transport Commission?

  It is an example of the reasonable person test being applied
• What factors do courts balance when applying the reasonable person test?

  The magnitude of risk, likelihood of damage, seriousness of risk, and burden to the defendant
• What does section 1 of the Compensation Act state regarding the reasonable person test?

  It considers whether taking steps would prevent a desirable activity from occurring
• What modifications exist for the reasonable person test?

  • Children
  • Emergency situations
  • Sporting events
  • Illness
  • State of knowledge
  • Special skills (negligence)
• How do children differ in the application of the reasonable person test?

  Children do not have the same understanding and awareness as a reasonable adult
• What was the outcome of Mullins v Richards (1998)?

  It established that children are judged differently under the reasonable person test
• What was the ruling in Watt v Hertfordshire (1954)?

  There was no breach of duty due to the emergency situation and the utility of the defendant's actions
• How does the reasonable person standard apply in sporting events?

  Spectators and competitors may be owed a lower standard of care
• What does Roberts v Ramsbottom (1980) establish regarding illness?

  Defendants are not liable if they were an automaton due to illness
• What must be considered regarding the state of knowledge in negligence cases?

  The current state of knowledge must determine what a reasonable person could foresee
• What is the Bolam test?

  It holds professionals to the standard of someone with that skill
• What does Bolitho v City & Hackney HA state about a recognized body of opinion?

  A recognized body of opinion must withstand logical analysis
• How does Bolam apply to medical consent situations?

  Doctors must advise of all material risks, not just follow a recognized body of opinion
• What are the three elements of Res Ipsa Loquitur?

  1. The incident must not usually happen without negligence
  2. The cause of the incident must be controllable
  3. There must be no other explanation
• What case established the principles of Res Ipsa Loquitur?

  Scott v London and St. Katherine Docks (1863)
• What does S11 of the Civil Evidence Act 1968 state about convictions?

  Convictions can be used as evidence in civil proceedings
• What is the significance of the balance of probabilities in S11 of the Civil Evidence Act 1968?

  It means an admission of liability can be established
• What are the key points of S11 Civil Evidence Act 1968?

  • Convictions as evidence in civil proceedings
  • Sections 11(1), (2)(a)(b), (3) outline the process
  • Balance of probabilities leads to admission of liability