Chap 2 Tort of Negligence

    Cards (146)

    • What should you be able to distinguish after completing this chapter?
      Intentional conduct and careless conduct
    • What must a claimant prove to establish a claim in negligence?
      All elements of negligence must be proven
    • What does the duty of care in negligence entail?
      Taking reasonable care for the safety of others
    • What is required to demonstrate knowledge of established duty situations?
      Knowledge of rules applied in novel duty situations
    • How is breach of duty defined in negligence?
      Failure to meet a reasonable standard of care
    • What factors do courts apply to determine reasonable care?
      Various factors related to the situation
    • What is the tort of negligence defined as?
      A breach of a legal duty of care
    • What must the courts determine regarding a defendant's responsibility?
      Whether the defendant owed a duty to take care
    • What are the elements a claimant must prove in negligence?
      Duty of care, breach, causation, defences
    • What does the neighbour principle establish?
      Reasonable care to avoid foreseeable harm
    • In the case of Donoghue v Stevenson, what was the claimant's issue?
      She did not buy the ginger beer
    • What does the term 'proximity' refer to in negligence?
      Close relationship in terms of foreseeability
    • What is the significance of the case Baker TE Hopkins & Son Ltd [1959]?
      It established duty to a rescuer
    • What is the Caparo three-part test used for?
      Determining duty in novel situations
    • What are the three factors of the Caparo test?
      Foresight, proximity, fairness
    • What does 'fair, just and reasonable' imply in the Caparo test?
      Policy considerations in imposing duty
    • How do courts gauge current social thought and trends?
      By considering societal changes in cases
    • What does the term 'neighbour' refer to in the context of negligence?
      Persons closely affected by one's actions
    • What is the significance of the case Robinson v Chief Constable of West Yorkshire Police?
      Clarified the Caparo test application
    • What is the first requirement of the Caparo test?
      Reasonable foreseeability of harm
    • What does 'sufficient proximity of relationship' mean in the Caparo test?
      Persons closely affected by my act
    • What does 'fair, just and reasonable' imply in the Caparo test?
      Courts can consider policy matters
    • How do the neighbour principle and Caparo test compare?
      • First two parts of Caparo express neighbour principle
      • No direct equivalent to third part
      • Third part allows courts to consider policy
    • What did Lord Reed clarify about the duty of care in Robinson v Chief Constable of West Yorkshire Police?
      Follow established authority for duty of care
    • What happens when the Supreme Court departs from established authority?
      Examine what is 'fair, just and reasonable'
    • How should courts develop law in novel cases?
      Incrementally and by analogy with authority
    • What was the outcome of Bourhill v Young regarding duty of care?
      No duty of care owed to Mrs. Bourhill
    • Why was there no duty of care in Bourhill v Young?
      1. Bourhill was not a foreseeable victim
    • What does proximity refer to in the Caparo test?
      Relationship between claimant and defendant
    • What was the outcome of the Caparo case regarding proximity?
      Claim for damages failed due to lack of proximity
    • What was the outcome of Marc Rich v Bishop Rock Marine Co Ltd regarding duty of care?
      NKK did not owe a duty of care
    • Why did the House of Lords rule against imposing a duty on NKK?
      It was not fair, just, and reasonable
    • What did Lord Steyn note in Marc Rich v Bishop Rock Marine Co Ltd?
      First two limbs of the test were satisfied
    • What is the critical question in determining duty of care?
      Is it fair, just, and reasonable to impose duty?
    • What was the outcome of Hill v Chief Constable of West Yorkshire?
      Police did not owe a duty of care
    • Why were the police exonerated in Hill?
      They owed a duty to the public at large
    • What was the key factor in Kirkham v Chief Constable of Greater Manchester Police?
      Police assumed a duty towards the prisoner
    • How did Kirkham differ from Hill?
      Greater proximity existed in Kirkham
    • What policy considerations influenced the decisions in Hill and Kirkham?
      Duty owed to public vs. individual responsibility
    • What did the courts consider in Hill regarding exceptional risk?
      Exceptional risk might impose a duty
    See similar decks