Flashcards
Unit 2 Negligence/Injunctions
Cards in this deck (46)
- 1Barratt v Minister Of DefenseBeldam L.J "I can see no reason why it should not be f,j or r as to leave a responsible adult to assume responsibility for his own actions in consuming drink."
- 2Capital+Counties v Hampshire County CouncilFire brigade attended scene of a fire. An officer ordered sprinklers to be turned off. Caused fire to spread and caused more damage.
HELD/ F, J and R to recognize duty of care against fire brigade. - 3Breach Of DutyBreach is the 2nd element of negligence. Once proved that D owed a duty of care to C, it must be proved that B breached that duty.
- 4Reasonable Man Test (Objective)*D compared to reasonable man in his position.
*Objective
*Established in Wells v Cooper
*Considers risk factors
*If reasonable man falls below standard of care, he has breached his duty. - 5Risk Factors>Degree of Risk (Bolton v Stone)
>Cost of Precaution (Latimer v A.E.C)
>Seriousness of Potential Harm (Paris v Stepney)
>Importance of Risky Activity (Marshall v Osmand) - 6Bolton v StoneCricket ball flew over fence and hit someone. Club took precautions. No breach. Stopping game is unnecessary.
- 7Latimer v A.E.CSome oil spilled on floor. Employees put down sawdust but worker slipped and injured himself.
NO breach - 8Paris v StepneyC blind in one eye. Worked for council involving risk to eyes. NO protection and blinded other eye.
BREACH- Fallen below standard of care. - 9Marshall v OsmandC stole car and was injured due to police chasing him in a high speed pursuit.
NO breach as it was socially important, the standard is lower. - 10Watt v HertfordshireWoman from accident trapped under a lorry. In the event, Jack fell onto C(fireman) leg, causing severe injuries.
- 11Wells v CooperC fell downstairs when handle that D fitted came off. No breach. Work done to ordinary carpenter standard.
- 12Bolam v Friern HospitalHeld that all professionals are held to the same standard as ordinary practitioners in the same field.
- 13Nettleship v NelsonLearner driver had accident. Standards as an unskilled driver are higher under the reasonable man test.
- 14Mullins v Richards2 schoolgirls having a play sword fight with rulers. Ruler broke and blinded 1 girl. Held that D was compared to ordinary child.
Realized risk??? - 15DamageDamage is the 3rd element of negligence. Establishing the true cause of damage. It needs a link between act/omission and D's damage.
- 16Types of Damage*Property
*Financial Loss
*Personal Injury - 172 Tests>Causation-But For Test
>Foreseeability-Remoteness of Damage(Wagon Mound)
Thin Skull Rule-D must take C as he finds him.(Smith v Leech Brain)
EXCEPTION TO REMOTENESS RULE
D can still be liable if damage was NOT FORESEEABLE. - 18Wagon MoundShip spilled oil into the sea.
- 19Smith v Leech BrainC burnt his lip with molten metal at work, due to employers negligence. Caused the the cancer that killed him.
LIABLE - 20Barnett v Kensington and Chelsea HospitalMan complained of sickness at hospital. Staff thought he was drunk and sent him home with no checkup. Died later of arsenic poisoning.
- 21Hughes v Lord Advocate (foreseeability)Electricity workers put tent over manhole, with paraffin lamp. Young boy played in hole, dropped the lamp and it exploded. Boy got severe burns.
HELD that explosion and fire cause same type of injury. It was foreseeable. - 22Remoteness of Intervening EventsCan break the chain of causation.
Smith v Littlewoods.
(Vandals broke into building and set fire to it. New act as vandals not common in that area.) - 23Damages + InjunctionsPurpose is to compensate C by putting him in the position if wrong had not been committed.
Accident>Injury>Claim>Compensation - 24Damages For Injury*Special damages
*General damages - 25SpecialCalculated exactly, expenses and specific sums lost or spent. In the form of wage slips and receipts used as proof.
This would cover:
*Loss of earnings up to trial.
*Damage to property.
*Cost of hiring.
*Medical expenses. - 26GeneralCannot be calculated exactly in monetary value.
This would cover:
*Pain and suffering
*Loss of amenity(hobbies)
*Future loss of earnings
*Cost of care when C is disabled - 27Other Damage*Exemplary
*Nominal - 28ExemplaryPaying C more than normal. When D committed tort willfully. Awards are rare as tort is compensation not punishment.
- 29NominalSmall sum is paid. Common in defamation cases.(Liable+Slander). Awards small as a penny.
- 30Loss of EarningsFuture loss of earnings=
Net annual earnings >< no. years left to work - 31Social Security PaymentsAny benefits must be deducted from award of damages before being paid to the C.
- 32DeathThe C has to prove that they were financially dependent on the deceased V.
- 33Pecuniary LossesFinancial losses like property damage, medical bills. Easy to calculate and special damages awarded.
- 34Non Pecuniary LossesGeneral damages.Not easy to calculate. Pain and suffering and physical and amenity. General damages awarded.
- 35Mitigation of LossDuring trial, C expected to keep costs low. Such as bills; car hire, medical costs.
- 36InjunctionsThese are court orders which stop someone from doing something.
*Provide remedy in tort claims.
*'He who seeks equity must come to the court with clean hands.'
*Supreme court of Judicature Act 1925. (consolidation) - 37Final InjunctionGranted at the end of the trial and hearing.
- 38Prohibited InjunctionCourt order forbids D from continuing to act in a particular way.
- 39Mandetory InjunctionCourt order requires D to take action to rectify consequences of their act.
- 40Interim InjunctionGranted before end of trial & hearing and even before proceedings have commenced.
- 41Quia Timet InjunctionsRare court orders to prevent apprehended legal wrong.
C must show damage is near certain to occur.
Damage is imminent and D will not be restrained without a court order. - 42Civil Procedure 3: Res Ipsa LoquiturThe Burden to Prove
*C has to prove that D was negligent.
*Standard of proof is 'beyond the balance of probabilities.' - 43Byrne v Boadle* Was D in control?
* Injury caused by negligence?
* Any other explanations? - 44Rule of Res Ipsa Loquitur'THE FACTS SPEAK FOR THEMSELVES'
- 45Scott v London and St Katherine's DocksC was hit by falling sugar bags from D's warehouse. The facts speak for themselves. It was up to the D to prove himself not negligent.
- 46Bee v Metropolitan RailwayC fell trough train door as it left the station. The D was still in control of the door. C was successful in their claim.
Information
- Description
- Flashcards on Unit 2 Negligence/Injunctions, created by htargett on 25/05/2015.
- Created by
- htargett
- Views
- 1
- Rating