9. NEGLIGENCE

LAW OF NEGLIGENCE

Learning Outcomes

  • Upon completion of this lesson, students should be able to:

    • Outline the definition of negligence under the Tort Act.

    • Identify the elements necessary to prove an action in negligence.

    • Discuss the general defences available to defendants.

Introduction to Negligence

  • Definition and Concept:

    • Negligence is a key tort that significantly defines tort law.

    • Two meanings exist for negligence:

      • Careless conduct (Example: knocking over a table while rushing).

      • As a tort, it requires specific elements to establish liability and damages.

Judicial Interpretation

  • Case Reference: Lochgelly Iron and Coal Co v McMullan [1934] AC 1

    • Lord Wright defined negligence as:

      • More than mere heedlessness or carelessness.

      • It involves duty, breach, and resultant damage to the owed party.

    • Establishing negligence necessitates proving specific elements, alongside carelessness and resultant injury.

Elements of Negligence

1. Duty of Care

  • Definition of Duty:

    • A legal obligation recognized by law established to avoid foreseeable harm to others.

    • Breaches of duty can give rise to negligence claims.

  • Morality vs. Legal Duty:

    • Breach of a moral or social duty typically does not constitute a legal duty.

      • Example: B slipping on a banana skin left by A, who had no legal obligation to remove it.

  • Relation and Proximity:

    • Duty of care must arise from some relationship or proximity between parties.

    • The 'neighbour principle' helps determine such relationships as established in Donoghue v Stevenson.

2. Case Study: Donoghue v Stevenson [1932] AC 562

  • Facts of the Case:

    • A plaintiff suffered illness after consuming ginger-beer containing a snail, from a manufacturer (defendant) with opaque bottles.

  • Legal Ruling:

    • Manufacturer held liable due to duty owed, establishing proximity as necessary to impose a duty of care.

    • 'Neighbour' concept dictates reasonable care to avoid foreseeable injury to others.

3. Case Study: Anns v Merton London Borough (1978) AC 728

  • Judicial Stages for Duty of Care:

    • Determines proximity between claimant and defendant.

    • Considers whether any factors might reduce the established duty.

4. Case Study: Gov. of Malaysia v Jumat Mahmud

  • Facts:

    • A pupil's actions at school resulted in injury due to lack of supervision by a teacher.

  • Legal Ruling:

    • Affirmation of duty owed by teachers to ensure student safety.

5. Breach of Duty

  • Definition of Breach:

    • Occurs when a defendant fails to meet the standard of care expected of a reasonable person.

  • Key Test (Blyth v Birmingham Waterworks Co (1856) 11 Ex 781):

    • Negligence entails failing to act as a reasonable person would.

6. Example of Breach of Duty:

  • Restaurant Case:

    • A restaurant failing to serve non-spoilt food breaches its duty of care as it can result in customer harm.

7. Reasonable Man Standard

  • Definition of Reasonable Man:

    • An ordinary individual without special skills.

    • The standard of care expected is based on foreseeable actions of the reasonable man.

8. Case Study: Kow Nan Seng v Nagamah & Ors (1982) 1 MLJ 128

  • Facts:

    • A doctor failed to respond properly to a patient's complaints leading to severe consequences.

  • Legal Ruling:

    • Doctor found liable; expected to reasonably foresee risks pertaining to their duty.

9. Case Study: Thomas v Grand Hyatt Hotel

  • Scenario:

    • Plaintiff slipped and fell at hotel without knowledge of the cause.

  • Judicial Ruling:

    • No evidence of dangerous conditions known to the defendant led to no breach of duty.

10. Causation & Remoteness of Damage

  • Definition of Damage/Injury:

    • Includes bodily harm, property damage, or emotional/financial loss due to defendant's breach.

  • Burden on Plaintiff:

    • Proof required that damage results from the defendant's breach.

  • Example of Reasonable Conduct:

    • A hotel guest sprained an ankle due to unsafe conditions caused by staff negligence.

11. Causation Test (But For Test):**

  • Usage:

    • Determines if the defendant’s actions directly contributed to the plaintiff’s injury.

    • If “Yes,” then the breach caused the injury; if “No,” breach is not seen as a cause for liability.

12. Case Study: Barnett v Chelsea and Kensington Hospital Management Committee

  • Facts:

    • A doctor failed to examine a patient who later died from poisoning.

  • Judicial Ruling:

    • Breach identified but not linked as a cause of death.

13. Additional Causation Cases: Mohd. Raihan Ibrahim v Gov. of Malaysia

  • Context:

    • Injury incurred in a classroom scenario points towards the duty owed by school staff.

14. Remoteness of Damage

  • Concept:

    • Assess if a reasonable individual would foresee the resulting damage.

    • Ruling: Yes – liability exists; No – liability does not exist.

    • Example: Gov. of Malaysia v Jumat Mahmud.

15. Case Study: Jaswant Singh v Central Electricity Board & Anor [1967] 1 MLJ 272

  • Facts:

    • Property destroyed due to negligence in managing electricity lines.

  • Ruling:

    • Duty established; caution required to avoid creating dangers.

Defences for Negligence

1. Volenti Non Fit Injuria

  • Definition:

    • The principle that a person cannot claim damages for an injury they voluntarily accepted risks from.

  • Case Reference: Nettleship v Weston (1971) 2 QB 691:

    • No agreement assumed risk, thus claiming pursued successfully.

2. Contributory Negligence

  • Definition:

    • Occurs when the plaintiff also fails to act prudently leading to their injury.

  • Key Elements:

    • Must act reasonably to prevent self-inflicted damage.

3. Case Study: Jones v Livox Quarries Ltd (1952) 2 QB 608

  • Scenario:

    • Plaintiff disobeyed safety instructions leading to injury, deemed contributory negligence.

4. Case Study: Jones v Boyce

  • Judicial Context:

    • Plaintiff's decision to jump off a coach to save himself was reasonable; no contributory negligence was established.

5. Inevitable Accident

  • Definition:

    • The defendant must establish the accident was unavoidable.

6. Case Study: Che Jah bt Mohamed Ariff v C.C. Scott (1952) 18 MLJ 69

  • Judicial Context:

    • Vehicle crash due to latent defects led to no negligence found upon due diligence.

7. Exclusion Clause

  • Definition:

    • Can liability for negligence be excluded?

  • Judicial Precedent:

    • Valid exclusion clauses require clear and unambiguous terms.

8. Case Study: Chin Hooi Nan v Comprehensive Auto Restoration Service Sdn Bhd (1995) 2 MLJ 10

  • Implications:

    • Not absolved of negligence imposed for damages, must demonstrate due diligence in managing property.