Duty of care

• Donoghue V Stevenson


  'Neighbour principle'

  Must take reasonable care not to injure your neighbour
• Caparo V Dickman


  Modern 3 part test to decide whether duty of care exists
• Part 1 Caparo Test:

  It was reasonably foreseeable that a person in claimants position would be injured
• Part 2 Caparo Test:

  There was sufficient proximity between parties
• Part 3 Caparo Test:

  It is fair, just and reasonable to impose liability on defendant
• Kent V Griffiths


  1st point of Caparo

  Must be foreseeable that the claimant would suffer harm
• Bourhill V Young


  2nd point of Caparo

  Must be sufficient proximity between parties (space, time, relationship)
• McLoughlin v O'Brian


  2nd point of Caparo

  Must be sufficient proximity between parties (space, time, relationship)
• Hill v Chief Constable of West Yorkshire

  3rd point of Caparo

  Must be fair, just and reasonable to impose duty of care
• Robinson v Chief Constable of West Yorkshire


  Caparo test only applied to novel situations