BREACH

• 1. reasonable man test


  Next, we must look at whether the defendant breached his duty towards the claimant. This is done by using the reasonable man test. The court will compare the defendant to the average person doing the same activity ( Blythe v Birmingham waterworks ).

  
  

  APPLY - who the D in scenario will be compared to
• Special skill


  reasonable man test is used to test whether someone has not achieved the standard required for their act. A person is regarded negligent if they fail to reach the standard of conduct a reasonable man would. If someone has a special skill the reasonable man would be someone of the same profession bolam v friend Barnet hospital management. Public authorities also owe a duty of care to employees walker v Northumberland county council
• Risk factors likelihood of harm 


  to ensure the test is fair the court will also take into account Any special risk factors that may be present . One thing to take into account is the likelihood of harm, the principle being that the more likely the harm is to occur from the defendants activity the more care proportionately is expected to be taken Bolton v stone

  
  

  law dictates that the more likely the harm then the more care is expected of d to avoid him being in breach bolton v stone

  
  

  
  

  APPLY TO SCENARIO
• Risk of serious injury 


  Secondly there is also a risk of serious injury this means that the more serious the potential of harm is the more care should be taken ( Paris v Stepney bs )

  if serious harm is foreseeable then d is expected to demonstrate that he took extra care to avoid it Paris v Stephaney BC

  
  

  
  

  
  

  APPLY
• Time of alleged breach 


  only standards known at the time are relevant and not any improvements made afterwards but before the case comes to court (roe v min of health)

  Only standards known at the time of the breach is expected as the defendant cannot be expected to see the standards in the future that may have been improved

  
  

  
  

  Apply
• Value of defendants activity 


  If defendant has a particularly useful valuable urgent or important job such as fire services then he may be allowed to exercise a little less care and yet still pass the test as it would be unreasonable and to burdensome on D watt v Hertfordshire

  LAW allows D TO BE LESS CAREFUL IF WHAT THEY ARE DOING IS MORE IMPORTANT ( NHS/ POLICE)

  
  

  
  

  Apply
• Cost of avoiding harm 


  Also the cost of avoiding harm can be considered ( Latimer v aec ) if harm is avoidable at reasonable expense, then the reasonable person might spend it

  The cost of avoiding harm is relevant as it does not mean that if harm is avoidable at great expense defendant is in breach for not spending it , it depends on other factor influences to latimer v A.E.C)

  
  

  
  

  Apply