Download (AS Law TORT CASES) Flashcard

Choose a format below:

TEXT Format (.txt) MS-Excel Format (.xls)

Select delimiter » Comma Semicolon Tab New Line Custom

Preview »

Side A ------ Side B
 Donoghue v Stevenson (1932) 
 ------ Established the "neighbour" principle.
 Caparo v Dickman (1990) ------ 3 part test for duty of care.
 Kent v Griffiths (2000) ------ Example of foreseeablility. (Foreseeable that someone waiting for an ambulance would suffer harm if it were unduly delayed.)
 Bourhill v Young (1943) 
 ------ Proximity in time alone is not enough to establish duty of care.
 McLoughlin v O’Brien (1983) 
 ------ Claimant's relationship to victim of accident was enough to establish proximity.
 Hill v Chief Constable of West Yorkshire (1988) 
 ------ Police do not owe a duty of care to victims of crime and their families.
 MPC v  Reeves (2001) 
 ------ Police owe a duty of care to people taken into custody.
 Orange v  Chief Constable  of West Yorks (2001) 
 ------ Duty of care is owed by police to prisoners only when the risk is known.
 Blyth v Birmingham Waterworks 
 ------ Baron Alderson's famous definition of the "reasonable man".
 Wells v Cooper (1954) 
 ------ An amateur doing DIY is expected to reach the same standard as a competant professional.
 Nettleship v Weston (1971) 
 ------ A learner driver must reach the same standard as a competent qualified driver.
 Bolam v Friern Barnet Hospital Management Committee (1957) ------ Duty of care for professionals : 2-part test.
 Bolitho v City & Hackney Health Authority (1997) ------ Courts may decide that the standard accepted by the profession in general is not high enough.
 Roe v Minister for Health (1954) ------ Reasonable man would not protect against unknown risks.
 Paris v Stepney Borough Council (1951) 
 ------ Greater care must be taken when the claimant is particularly vulnerable.
 Walker v Northumberland County Council (1995) ------ If an employee suffers work-related illness, employer must take extra care to avoid a repeat or worse illness.
 Bolton v Stone (1951) 
 ------ No need to protect against very remote risks.
 Haley v London Electricity Board (1964) 
 ------ It is reasonable to protect against risks which are statistically likely.
 Latimer v AEC (1952) 
 ------ Duty of care is not breached if the defendant has taken all practical precautions.
 Watt v Hertfordshire County Council (1954) 
 ------ Lower standard of care where the benefits of the risk outweigh the potential harm.
 Day v High Performance Sports (2003) 
 ------ Lower standard of care when making a rescue attempt.
 Barnett v Chelsea & Kensington Hospital Management Committee (1968) 
 ------ "But for" test.
 Fairchild v Glenhaven Funeral Services Ltd. (2002) 
 ------ Modified "but for" test in asbestos cases.
 Barker v Corus (2006) ------ Modified "but for" test in asbestos cases.
 Smith v Littlewoods (1987) 
 ------ Intervening acts which are not foreseeable will break the chain of causation.
 Corr v IBC Vehicles (2006) 
 ------ Depression suffered as a result of an accident is not an intervening act.
 The Wagon Mound (1961) 
 ------ The defendant is liable for all foreseeable damage, but nothing else.
 Bradford v Robinson Rentals (1967) 
 ------ Defendant is liable if the type of harm is foreseeable, even if the form is takes is unusual.
 Hughes v Lord Advocate (1963) 
 ------ Defendant is liable if the type of harm is foreseeable, even if the form is takes is unusual
 Doughty v Turner Asbestos (1964) ------ Damage which is not foreseeable is too remote.
 Smith v Leech Brain (1962) ------ Take your victim as you find him.
 Gabriel v Kirklees Metropolitan Council (2004) 
 ------ Confirmed that reasonable foreseeability is still the correct test for remoteness of damage.
 Scott v London & St. Katherine’s Docks (1865) 
 ------ 3 part test for res ipsa loquitur.
 Bergin v David Wickes Television Ltd (1994) ------ "Res ipsa loquitur is a convenient label for a group of situations where there has been an unexplained accident, and common sense suggests there has been negligence." 

 Pearson v North Western Gas Board (1968) ------ Even where res ipsa loquitur is proven, the defendant can avoid liability by proving that they had taken all reasonable precautions.

Side A ------ Side B
 Donoghue v Stevenson (1932) 
 ------ Established the "neighbour" principle.
 Caparo v Dickman (1990) ------ 3 part test for duty of care.
 Kent v Griffiths (2000) ------ Example of foreseeablility. (Foreseeable that someone waiting for an ambulance would suffer harm if it were unduly delayed.)
 Bourhill v Young (1943) 
 ------ Proximity in time alone is not enough to establish duty of care.
 McLoughlin v O’Brien (1983) 
 ------ Claimant's relationship to victim of accident was enough to establish proximity.
 Hill v Chief Constable of West Yorkshire (1988) 
 ------ Police do not owe a duty of care to victims of crime and their families.
 MPC v  Reeves (2001) 
 ------ Police owe a duty of care to people taken into custody.
 Orange v  Chief Constable  of West Yorks (2001) 
 ------ Duty of care is owed by police to prisoners only when the risk is known.
 Blyth v Birmingham Waterworks 
 ------ Baron Alderson's famous definition of the "reasonable man".
 Wells v Cooper (1954) 
 ------ An amateur doing DIY is expected to reach the same standard as a competant professional.
 Nettleship v Weston (1971) 
 ------ A learner driver must reach the same standard as a competent qualified driver.
 Bolam v Friern Barnet Hospital Management Committee (1957) ------ Duty of care for professionals : 2-part test.
 Bolitho v City & Hackney Health Authority (1997) ------ Courts may decide that the standard accepted by the profession in general is not high enough.
 Roe v Minister for Health (1954) ------ Reasonable man would not protect against unknown risks.
 Paris v Stepney Borough Council (1951) 
 ------ Greater care must be taken when the claimant is particularly vulnerable.
 Walker v Northumberland County Council (1995) ------ If an employee suffers work-related illness, employer must take extra care to avoid a repeat or worse illness.
 Bolton v Stone (1951) 
 ------ No need to protect against very remote risks.
 Haley v London Electricity Board (1964) 
 ------ It is reasonable to protect against risks which are statistically likely.
 Latimer v AEC (1952) 
 ------ Duty of care is not breached if the defendant has taken all practical precautions.
 Watt v Hertfordshire County Council (1954) 
 ------ Lower standard of care where the benefits of the risk outweigh the potential harm.
 Day v High Performance Sports (2003) 
 ------ Lower standard of care when making a rescue attempt.
 Barnett v Chelsea & Kensington Hospital Management Committee (1968) 
 ------ "But for" test.
 Fairchild v Glenhaven Funeral Services Ltd. (2002) 
 ------ Modified "but for" test in asbestos cases.
 Barker v Corus (2006) ------ Modified "but for" test in asbestos cases.
 Smith v Littlewoods (1987) 
 ------ Intervening acts which are not foreseeable will break the chain of causation.
 Corr v IBC Vehicles (2006) 
 ------ Depression suffered as a result of an accident is not an intervening act.
 The Wagon Mound (1961) 
 ------ The defendant is liable for all foreseeable damage, but nothing else.
 Bradford v Robinson Rentals (1967) 
 ------ Defendant is liable if the type of harm is foreseeable, even if the form is takes is unusual.
 Hughes v Lord Advocate (1963) 
 ------ Defendant is liable if the type of harm is foreseeable, even if the form is takes is unusual
 Doughty v Turner Asbestos (1964) ------ Damage which is not foreseeable is too remote.
 Smith v Leech Brain (1962) ------ Take your victim as you find him.
 Gabriel v Kirklees Metropolitan Council (2004) 
 ------ Confirmed that reasonable foreseeability is still the correct test for remoteness of damage.
 Scott v London & St. Katherine’s Docks (1865) 
 ------ 3 part test for res ipsa loquitur.
 Bergin v David Wickes Television Ltd (1994) ------ "Res ipsa loquitur is a convenient label for a group of situations where there has been an unexplained accident, and common sense suggests there has been negligence."

Pearson v North Western Gas Board (1968) ------ Even where res ipsa loquitur is proven, the defendant can avoid liability by proving that they had taken all reasonable precautions.