negligence

• donoghue v stevenson

  duty of care
• caparo v dickman 


  proximity - bournhill v young reasonably forseeable - kent v Griffiths fair,just and reasonable - hill v cheif constable West yorkshire
• McLoughlin v O'Brien


  proximity of the relationship
• bolom v friern barnet 


  professionals judged as such
• nettleship v weston 


  learner drivers are held at the same standard of passed drivers
• mullins v richards


  children are judged at the standard of their age
• Paris v stepney 


  special characteristics (e.g., blind deaf etc)
• bolton v stone


  size of risk
• latimer v AEC

  precautions - e.g., water on the floor - evacuation - injury still followed after the spillage was cleaned up
• roe v minister of health

  unknown risks - no breach of duty of care
• public benefit

  day v high performance sports - no breach in duty of care
• public benefit


  watt v hertfordshire - greater risks should be taken in emergency situations
• wagon mound 


  remotness of damage - damages can be claimed if reasonably forseeable
• barnett v Chelsea 


  factual causation - 'but for test' - would the injury had
• hughes v lord advocate

  injury forseeable
• thin skull rule


  smith v leach brain - defendent liable