negligence eval

• pro - duty supports aims of tort - morality
• con - caparo test lacks clarity making advice hard for lawyers
• con - forseeability and remoteness overlap
• con - fair just and reasonable test is vague
• pro - caparo only applied in novel scenerios saves time
• con - no breach def and reasonable person is subjective
• pro - burden on c
• con - unfair to compare learners and competent people
• pro - damage is consistent with criminal law
• con - remoteness is vague test
• con - intervening acts can be difficult to determine
• pro - size of risk is good to consider