Negligence case law revision

Negligence - Duty of care - Neighbour principle

• Donoghue v Stevenson

• Caparo v Dickman

• McLoughlin v O'Brian

• Hill v CC of West Yorks.

Negligence - duty of care - new 3 part test for duty

• Caparo v Dickman

• Donoghue v Stevenson

• Bradford v Robinson Rentals

• Kent v Griffiths

Negligence - duty of care - 1) reasonably foreseeable?

• Kent v Griffiths

• Hill v CC West Yorks.

• Donoghue v Stevenson

• Roe v MOH

Negligence - duty of care - 2) sufficient proximity?

• Bourhill v Young

• Donoghue v Stevenson

• Caparo v Dickman

• McLoughlin v O'Brien

Negligence - duty of care - another case you could use for duty of care - stage 2 of the Caparo v Dickman test (i.e. instead of Bourhill v Young)...

• McLoughlin v O'Brian

• Nettleship v Weston

• Roe v MOH

• Bolam

Negligence - duty of care - fair, just and reasonable?

• Hill v CC of West Yorks.

• Roe v MOH

• Bolton v Stone

• McLoughlin v O'Brian

Negligence - breach - illustrate the reasonable man standard for breach.

• Blyth v Birmingham Waterworks

• Barnet v C & K Hospitals

• Donoghue v Stevenson

• Caparo v Dickman

Negligence - breach - what did the reasonable man standard for breach used to be called?

• The man on the Clapham omnibus

• Bob

• The man on Supertram

• The woman on the bike

Negligence - breach - two cases used to illustrate a professional breach of a duty of care? (Pick 2)

• Bolam v Friern Barnet

• Bolitho

• Nettleship v Weston

• Paris v Stepney BC

Negligence - breach - case that states that there is no learner standard. Learners held to standard of ordinary competent person.

• Nettleship v Weston

• Caparo v Dickman

• Donoghue v Stevenson

• Bolton v Stone