Negligence Cases

Duty of Care
Caparo v Dickman

Damage must be reasonably foreseeable-Proven

Damage must be reasonably foreseeable- Not Proven

Sufficient proximity between the parties-Proven

Sufficient proximity between the parties- Not Proven

Fair, just and reasonable to impose a duty

Fair, just and reasonable to impose a duty- Exception

Breach of Duty Definition

Objective 'reasonably man' test

Inexperience is irrelevant

Age can lower standard of care

Profession can raise standard of care

Size/degree of risk

Seriousness of harm

Practicability of Precautions

Benefits of taking risk

Res Ipsa Loquitur

Causation- 'But for' test

Intervening Acts

Remoteness of damage

How harm happens is irrelevant

Thin Skull Principle