Overview of Negligence

Briefly explain the facts of the case of Donoghue v Stevenson.

• Donoghue v Stevenson established the modern law of negligence, laying the foundation of the duty of care principle.

• Donoghue v Stevenson was a case about a contract dispute between two companies.

• Donoghue v Stevenson involved a criminal case regarding theft.

• Donoghue v Stevenson was a landmark case in property law.

What is the first thing that must be proved in a negligence claim?

• Duty of care

• Breach of duty

• Causation

• Damages

Match the following duty of care relationships with their key precedents: 1) Motorist for other road users 2) Manufacturers for their consumers/customers 3) Doctors for their patients

• A

• R v Adamako

• B

• Nettleship v Weston

• C

• Donoghue v Stevenson

Explain the concept of foreseeability in the context of duty of care.

• Foreseeability refers to the ability to predict or expect harm that may result from certain actions or omissions.

• Foreseeability is the legal obligation to act in a certain way to prevent harm.

• Foreseeability is the process of identifying potential risks in a business environment.

• Foreseeability is the assessment of financial implications of a decision.

Task: State the ‘but for’ test. Using the ‘but for test’, explain why the claimant was not successful in the case of Barnett v Kensington and Chelsea Hospital. The claimant’s husband went to the hospital with 2 other men, complaining of stomach pains after drinking tea at their workplace. The hospital doctor sent them home and told them to see their own doctor the next day. The claimant’s husband died that night. It was found that he had died of arsenic poisoning, the poison having been found in his tea. The court was informed that there is no cure for arsenic poisoning. Neild J’s judgement stated: “My conclusions are: that the plaintiff has failed to establish, on the balance of probabilities, that the deceased’s death resulted from the negligence of the defendants, my view being that, had all care been taken, the deceased might still have died.”

• The ‘but for’ test determines causation by asking if the harm would have occurred 'but for' the defendant's actions. In Barnett v Kensington and Chelsea Hospital, the claimant was not successful because even with proper care, the deceased would have died due to incurable arsenic poisoning.

• The ‘but for’ test is used to assess the duty of care. In Barnett v Kensington and Chelsea Hospital, the claimant was not successful because the hospital had no duty of care towards the deceased.

• The ‘but for’ test is a method to evaluate breach of duty. In Barnett v Kensington and Chelsea Hospital, the claimant was not successful because the hospital breached its duty of care.

• The ‘but for’ test is a legal principle to determine negligence. In Barnett v Kensington and Chelsea Hospital, the claimant was not successful because the hospital was found negligent.

Using the precedent of Hughes v Lord Advocate, the court allowed his claim to succeed because:

• the injury was foreseeable even if the exact way it happened was not

• the injury was not foreseeable

• the defendant was not negligent

• the claimant was at fault

Research the case of Froom v Butcher (1975). Why were C’s damages reduced and by how much?

• C's damages were reduced due to contributory negligence by 20%.

• C's damages were reduced due to contributory negligence by 25%.

• C's damages were reduced due to contributory negligence by 15%.

• C's damages were reduced due to contributory negligence by 10%.

Explain the concept of contributory negligence as described under s.1(1) Law Reform (Contributory Negligence) Act 1945.

• Contributory negligence is a defense that reduces the amount of damages a plaintiff can recover based on the degree to which the plaintiff's own negligence contributed to the cause of the injury.

• Contributory negligence is a legal doctrine that allows a plaintiff to recover full damages even if they are partially at fault.

• Contributory negligence is a principle that completely bars recovery for a plaintiff who is found to be even slightly negligent.

• Contributory negligence is a rule that applies only in criminal cases, not civil cases.

Discuss the requirements to prove consent to harm as defence

• The requirements include voluntary agreement, capacity to consent, and knowledge of the act.

• The requirements include coercion, lack of capacity, and ignorance of the act.

• The requirements include voluntary agreement, coercion, and ignorance of the act.

• The requirements include lack of capacity, coercion, and knowledge of the act.

What is the significance of the 'neighbour principle' established in Donoghue v Stevenson?

• It established that individuals owe a duty of care only in contractual relationships.

• It established that individuals owe a duty of care to everyone in society.

• It established that individuals owe a duty of care only to their family members.

• It established that individuals owe a duty of care to those who are closely and directly affected by their actions.