Negligence (Non-novel Cases)

Neighbour Principle-

Case/Judge quote

Donoghue v Stevenson:

must take reasonable steps to avoid acts/omissions that can reasonably foresee injuring your neighbour

Lord Atkin- any person who is closely + directly affected by acts/omissions

Negligence Format for Scenario

Duty of Care

(Donoghue v Stevenson)

Breach

(Blyth v Birmingham Waterworks)

“Negligence is the omission to do something a reasonable man would do or something that a prudent or a reasonable man would not do” → 1. Degree of skill 2. Degree of risk

2) Breach

1. Degree of SKILL

• Special Characteristics

Adult Professionals: Bolam- other professionals would they do the same

Adults: Wells v Cooper- compared to a reasonably competent person doing the same activity

Learners: Nettleship v Weston- same standard of care expected as non-learners

Children: Mullin v Richards- lower expected, a 15-year-old wouldn’t appreciate the risk

Paris v Stepney- take reasonable steps to protect any particularly vulnerable claimants

2) Breach

2. Degree of RISK

Bolton v Stone: LOW

Miller v Jackson: HIGH
Latimer v AEC: shutting factory was unreasonable Low Cost→ expect precautions to be taken

2) Breach

Public Benefit

Day v High Day Performance: risks may be excusable in emergencies/socially important

3) Damage (Causation)

Factual-

Barnett v Chelsea: ‘but for’ actions of D would damages have occured

Legal-

(C) McKew v Holland: C’s actions was NAI

(TP) Knightley v Jones: TP was negligent

Acts of God are considered no one’s fault

Remoteness Test-

Wagon Mound- is damage reasonably foreseeable?

Hughes v Lord Advocate- method of injury doesn’t have to be RS, only damage

Egg-shell-skull Rule:

(exception to remoteness test)

Smith v Leech- employer found liable for cancer created from a burn