Use LEFT and RIGHT arrow keys to navigate between flashcards;
Use UP and DOWN arrow keys to flip the card;
H to show hint;
A reads text to speech;
30 Cards in this Set
- Front
- Back
|
What is the importance of breach of duty setting the standards? |
Is there standards are too high the floodgates will be open. If the standards are too low it socially unacceptable. |
|
|
What is the requirement for breach of duty? |
D must meet or exceed the minimum accepted standards. |
|
|
What is the two stage test for breach of duty? |
What standard of care was D expected to reach? Did D reach that standard of care? |
|
|
What are the rules for the standard of care D was expected to reach? (2) |
What would a reasonable person not do. Objective test. |
|
|
What case outlines that it is not a standard of perfection? |
Blyth. |
|
|
What does the case of Roe outline for breach of duty? |
Defendant is judged by the state of knowledge at the time not with hindsight. Holding medical professionals to an impossibly high standard would be impractical. |
|
|
What case outlines that the purpose of the defendant must be taken into account? |
Watt. The defendant wrist injury to the claimant to save the life of a victim so he was not negligent. |
|
|
What does the case of Nettleship outline? |
Learner drivers have to be held to the same standard as experienced drivers. |
|
|
What does the case of Glasgow outline? |
Responsibility cannot be negated just because someone else owns the building the negligence occurs in. |
|
|
What rules surround the issue of inexperience? |
Inexperience is not an issue. Inexperienced professionals must reach the standard of a competent experienced professional. The standard for or a doctor's first surgery is just as high as his 100th surgery. |
|
|
What are the key exceptions to the general rule? (3) |
Age. Illness. Special skill or knowledge. |
|
|
What is outlined in the case of Mullin? |
The standard expected drops to what the ordinary and prudent person at that age would do. It would be unfair to hold a 12 year-old to the standards of a 30-year old. Miners can still be negligent if they are below the expected standard of their age. |
|
|
What is the exception of illness to the standard expected and what case outlines this? |
An unknown medical condition or illness can change the standard expected. Mansfield: lorry driver crashed his lorry because of an illness he did not know he had, the reasonable man would not have acted differently as he would not have known he had the illness either. If the defendant knows about the illness the standard expected stays the same as they should know how to work with the illness. |
|
|
What are the general rules surrounding the standard expected when there is special skill or knowledge? |
The standard is increased for special skills. The test is subjectified to the skills. |
|
|
What happened in the case of Bolam? |
There was no liability as the things not done were usually not done in this practice. |
|
|
What mini test came from the case of Bolitho? |
Is there a responsible body of opinion that supports what the defenders did? |
|
|
What principle came from the case of Bateman and what case was this applied in? |
If you hold yourself out as having a particular skill then you must perform that skill with reasonable care. Wells: fitted door handle even though this was not in his trade, he was still liable for the injuries caused as he made himself part of this trade. |
|
|
What is the rules surrounding precautions and the key case? |
Determine if they are practical. Weigh up the risk and the difficulty of eliminating it. Wagon Mound No 2. |
|
|
What rules surround running and avoiding the risk? |
Weigh up what could happen v what would happen if you did nothing. Look at the likelihood of risk materialising and what the severity would be if it did. |
|
|
What case shows a serious risk but was unlikely and expensive and hard to take precaution against? |
Bolton. |
|
|
What case shows a serious risk that was quite likely and cheap to prevent? |
Paris. |
|
|
What does the court have to consider because of the Social Action, Responsibility and Heroism act 2015 ss1-4? (3) |
Did the defendant act for the benefit of society? Did the defendant take a mostly responsible approach? Did the defendant acted heroically by intervening in an emergency. |
|
|
What does Morris say is usually good evidence of reasonable care? |
Following a generally accepted practice. |
|
|
When is following a generally accepted practice not good evidence of reasonable care and what case shows this? |
If the practice itself is found to be negligent. Cavanagh. |
|
|
What does stage 2 of the test involve? |
Proving the breach of duty. |
|
|
Who is there a heavy onus on to prove the breach? |
The claimant. |
|
|
What are the three factors to be considered when proving the breach of duty? |
1. Was the thing causing the damage exclusively under the control of the defendant? 2. Could the accident have happened in the normal course of events without the negligence of the defendant? 3. Is there any explanation as to why the accident occurred without the negligence of the defendant? |
|
|
What two contrasting cases outline rules on whether D exclusively controls the thing causing the damage? |
Gee: train has full responsibility and control of the doors so is their fault, the train had only just left the station so no one has time to tamper with it. Easson: it was later on in the train journey in there is more time for people to tamper with the doors so it was not fully their fault. |
|
|
What case relates to whether the accident could have happened in the normal course of events without the defendant's negligence? |
Mahon: the doctor removed the wrong kidney and this would not have happened without the negligence of defendant. |
|
|
What case relates to the being an explanation as to why the accident occurred without the negligence of the defendant? |
Barkway: the accident was caused by a burst tyre that the driver should have checked before starting the journey. |
