Negligence

• what is negligence?

  The failure to exercise reasonable care that results in physical damage, psychiatric injury or economic loss
• what are three types of physical damage?

  Death

  Personal Injury

  Damage to property
• who is the burden of proof on in any civil claim?

  The burden of proof is on the claimant. The standard of proof is on a balance of probabilities, 52%.
• what are the three elements of a successful negligence claim?

  There must have been a duty of care

  The duty of care was breached

  There was damage as a result
• why does the claimant need to prove that the defendant owes them a DOC?

  This establishes a legal relationship between the parties
• what are the three tests to establish a duty of care?

  Original test

  Caparo test

  New Ruling from Robinson v Chief Constable of West Yorkshire (Robinson Test)
• what is the significance of the case of blyth v birmingham waterworks co?

  It defines negligence
• What is the definition of negligence according to blyth v birmingham waterworks co?

  Doing something which a reasonable person would not do, or not doing something which a reasonable person would do
• After a duty of care has been established, what are the two things the courts will establish?

  First, the court will set the standard of care required of the reasonable person doing that activity. The second is that the court will establish if the care that the defendant took fell below that standard
• what are the standards of care?

  Normal circumstances

  If the D has a special skill or special knowledge

  If the defendant is a child

  If the defendant is a learner
• What is the standard of care in normal circumstances?

  The standard of care required in law, generally, is the standard of the reasonable person. We do not need to act perfectly, and as such the courts will judge the D by an objective standard
• What is the significance of the case of Wells v Cooper?

  It shows how the courts will judge the Defendant in an objective standard.
• What is the significance of the case of Nettleship v Weston?

  Learners will be judged against experienced people doing the same activity
• what is the standard of care if the defendant has a special care or knowledge?

  A person who possesses a special skill will not be judged by a reasonable person, but by the standard of the D's professional peers.
• In order to set a professional standard of care, judges have to rely on the opinions of those who are experts in the particular field.
• why did the claimant in bolam v friend barnet hospital management committee not win the case?

  It was decided that the doctors had followed standard practice in not giving the claimant relaxant drugs.
• What two questions are asked from bolam v frien barnet hospital management commitee?

  First, It is asked if the D's conduct falls below the standard of the ordinary, competent member of their profession. Second, Is there a substantial body of opinion within the profession that would support the course of action taken by the defendant.
• what is the significance of the case of bolitho v city and hackney health authority?

  in this case, the HL suggested that a court should decide what standard of care applies rather than considering professional opinions.
• what is the significance of the case of montgomery v lanarkshire health board?

  The supreme court decided that patients' choices should be focused on
• what is the standard of care if the defendant is a child?

  Children arent judged against the reasonable person- to protect the children. Instead, courts have held that a child should be judge by the standards of an ordinary child of the same age as the defendanr
• What is the significance of the case of mullins v richards?

  It shows how children are not judged against the reasonable person. In order to protect children, the courts have held that a child should be judged by thestandard of the ordinary child of the same age as the D.
• when deciding whether the defendant has fallen bellow the standard expected the courts need to take into account, what?

  The size of the risk

  If the C has special characteristics

  If the risk has a social benefit when taken

  If the cost of avoiding the risk was unreasonable or excessive
• the greater the likelihood of damage occurring ,the more the law expects us to guard against it. A defendant will not be negligent if the damage was not foreseeable consequences of the conduct,
• the more serious the risk, the greater the precautions to be taken. If the defendantknows that the claimant has a particular disability, or is particularly sensitive insome area, then the defendant is expected to take greater care of the claimant
• The social benefit of the defendant’s activity may occasionally justify taking greater risks than would otherwise be the case, although the courts are very wary of excusing negligence
• if a large reduction of risk could be obtained by a small expenditure, the defendant has acted unreasonably if he does not take the precautions. If great expense would only produce a very small reduction in risk it will be reasonable to do nothing.
• what cases can be referenced when talking about the size of risk?

  Bolton v Stone

  Haley v London electricity board
• What cases can be referenced when talking about the special characteristics of the claimant?

  Paris v Stepney Borough Council
• what cases can be referenced when talking about if the risk benefits the public?

  Watt v Hertfordshire county council

  Day v High performance sport
• what case can be referenced when talking about if the cost of avoiding the harm was unreasonable or excessive?

  Latimer v AEC
• what are the facts of blythe v birmingham waterworks co 1856?

  A plug in a water main, maintained by the defendant, became loose after extreme weather, causing flooding in the claimant's house.
• What was the decision of blythe v birmingham waterworks co 1856?

  The court found no negligence, as the weather was exceptional, and the defendant had taken all reasonable precautions.
• What are the facts in Bolam v Friern Barnet Hospital Management Committee [1957]?

  The claimant was undergoing electro-convulsive therapy without relaxants or restraints, leading to injury. There was divided medical opinion about using these methods.
• What was the decision of Bolam v Friern Barnet Hospital Management Committee [1957]?


  The court ruled in favor of the hospital, as the treatment method was supported by a responsible body of medical opinion.
• What was the ratio decidendi of Bolam v friern barnet hospital management committee 1957?

  A medical professional is not negligent if they act in accordance with a practice accepted as proper by a responsible body of medical professionals, even if others disagree
• what are the facts of nettleship v weston 1971?

  A learner driver, Weston, crashed during a driving lesson, injuring her instructor, Nettleship.
• What was the decision of nettleship v weston 1971?

  The court held Weston liable, despite being a learner, as all drivers are expected to meet the same standard of care.
• What was the ratio decidendi of nettleship v weston?

  Even learner drivers are held to the standard of a competent and experienced driver, as public safety requires a uniform standard​
• what were the facts in wells v cooper ?

  The claimant was injured when a door handle, installed by the defendant (a non-professional), came off.
• What was the decision in wells v cooper?

  The court ruled that Cooper met the standard of a reasonable amateur, as the task of fitting a door handle didn’t require professional expertise.