Caparo test

• what is the significance of the case of caparo v dicman industries?

  it gives the test to be done where there is no established duty.
• The three questions asked by the Caparo test are:

  1. Was the harm reasonably foreseeable?
  2. Was there a close relationship between the defendant and the victim?
  3. Would it have been fair, just, and reasonable to have imposed a duty of care?
• what is the significance of the case of hill v chief constable of west Yorkshire?

  It gives an example of where it would not have been fair just and reasonable to have imposed a duty of care.
• what case gives an example of where it would not have been fair just and reasonable to have imposed a duty of care?

  Hill v chief constable of west yorkshire
• What are the brief facts of hill v chief constable of west Yorkshire?

  The mother of the last victim of the Yorkshire Ripper (Peter Sutcliffe) sued the police, arguing they had negligently failed to apprehend him earlier, which would have prevented her daughter’s murder.
• What case gives an example where the defendant and victim were not in close proximity?

  bourhill v young
• What is the significance of the case of bourhill v young?

  it gives an example where the defendant and victim were not in close proximity
• what are the brief facts of bourhill v young?

  A pregnant woman heard a fatal motorbike crash but did not see it. After walking past the scene later and seeing blood, she suffered a nervous shock and miscarriage. She tried to claim against the deceased rider's estate.
• what are the brief facts of kent v griffiths?

  An asthma patient suffered respiratory failure after an ambulance, which had been requested by a GP, arrived unreasonably late without a valid explanation. The delay led to the patient suffering a preventable injury.
• what is the significance of the case of kent v griffiths?

  It is an example of where the harm in a given situation was reasonably foreseeable.
• what case gives an example of where the harm in a given situation was reasonably foreseeable?

  Kent v Griffiths
• what is the significance of the case of jolley v sutton borough council?

  it gives an example of where it would've been reasonably foreseeable that harm would've occurred in a given situation.
• which case gives an example of where it would've been reasonably foreseeable that harm would've occurred in a given situation?

  Jolley v Sutton London borough council
• give the brief facts of Jolley v Sutton London borough council

  A 14-year-old boy was injured when a boat, left abandoned by the council, fell on him. He and a friend had been attempting to repair it.
• what is the significance of the case of McLoughlin v o'brian?

  It gives an example of where the defendant and victim where in close enough proximity, additionally, it confirms that proximity can include relationships and not just physical closeness.
• what case gives an example of where the defendant and victim where in close enough proximity, additionally, it confirms that proximity can include relationships and not just physical closeness?

  Mcloughlin v O'brian
• what are the brief facts of mcloughlin v o'brian

  A woman suffered psychiatric harm after seeing her injured family members in hospital shortly after a car crash caused by negligence.
• what is the significance of the case of robinson v chief constable of west Yorkshire police?

  It gives an example of where it would have been fair, just, and reasonable to impose a duty of care.
• What case gives an example of where it would have been fair, just, and reasonable to impose a duty of care?

  Robinson v Chief constable of west Yorkshire police
• Give the brief facts of robinson v chief constable of west Yorkshire police

  An elderly woman was knocked over and injured during a police attempt to arrest a drug dealer on a busy street.