NEGLIGENCE;TORT LAW

FLASHCARDS
 1)DUTY OF CARE

 A) Neighbour test(Donoghue v stevenson)

 B) Anns test(proximity based upon foreseeability, policy
considerations)
 C) Caparo test {foreseeability(haley v london electricity
board),proximity(goodwill v british pregnancy service), whether its
fair just and reasonable to impose duty(marc rich v bishop rock
marine)}
 2)BREACH OF THE DUTY
OF CARE

 Extend of breach

 Standard is that of a reasonable man

 Haley v London electricity board

 3)CAUSATION
i. Factual causation- ‘But for’ test
Modifications of the test
a) Loss of chance cases- spring v guardian assurance
b) Material contribution- Bonnington Castings v Wardlaw
c) Material contribution to risk of harm-Mcghee v National coal board ;
Fairchild v glenhaven funeral service ltd
d) Novus actus interveniens-{by third party(Knightley v johns and others)by
claimants acts(Mckew v Holland)by acts of nature/god(Carslogie steamship
co. v Royal Norwegian Government)
i. Legal Causation

-Direct consequence test ; Re Polemis>>> overruled in Wagon

Mound 1 thus establishment of Reasonable foreseeability test

- Damage should not differ substantially from the one that could be
foreseen by D.

- Distinguish btn Doughty v Turner and; Hughes v Lord Advocate

 Thin skull rule

- D should take C as he finds him

- Smith v Leech Brain

 Crumbling skull

-D is not liable for harm that C could suffer anyway

-Athey v Leonati