click below
click below
Normal Size Small Size show me how
Tort 1
Negligence
| Term | Definition |
|---|---|
| Donoghue v Stevenson | Snail case - neighbour principle |
| Caparo v Dickman | 3 part test for duty |
| Haley v LEB | Duty owed to blind man |
| Bourhill v Young | Not foreseeable or proximate - fishwife |
| Griffiths v Lindsay | Taxi driver - not FJR to impose duty |
| Hill v CC W Yorks | Not FJR to impose duty on police - Ripper |
| Bolton v Stone | Cricket club - no breach |
| Watt v Herts CC | Firefighter - utility |
| Mullins v Richards | Standard of care for kids |
| Bolam v Friern | Standard of care for experts |
| Blythe v B'ham Waterworks | Standard of the reasonable man |
| Nettleship v Weston | Learner driver must meet standard of competent driver |
| Latimer v AEC | Slippery floor and sawdust |
| Paris v Stepney | Goggles! |
| The Oropesa | NOT a novus actus interveniens |
| Barnett v Chelsea | No factual causation |
| Wilkin-Shaw v Fuller | Stranger broke the chain |
| Smith v Leech Brain | Thin skull rule |
| Wilsher v Essex AHA | 5 possible causes of child's blindness |
| Fairchild v Glenhaven | Mesothelioma - all employers liable |
| Hughes v Lord Advocate | Extent of damage needn't be foreseeable |
| The Wagon Mound | Damage may not be too remote |
| Ward v Tesco | Yoghurt - res ipsa loquitur |
| Robinson v CC W Yorks | Caparo test only needed in 'novel' situations |
| FB v Alexandra Hospital | New Dr judged by standard of competent Dr |
| Montgomery v Lanarkshire | Dr must consult patient over treatment |
| Bolitho v CHHA | Adapts the Bolam test |