152732
Description
Mind Map by val.corbett, updated more than 1 year ago
|
Created by val.corbett
almost 11 years ago
|
|
Duty of Care - Historical
Development
- Donoghue v Stevenson [1932] - snail in a bottle
- Duty established by: 1. Foreseeability of
the harm and 2. Proximity of relationship
- Duty established by: 1. Foreseeability of
the harm and 2. Proximity of relationship
- Anns v Merton London
Borough Council [1978]
- Two Stage Test: 1.
Relationship of
neighbourhood/proximity?
Prima facie duty of care
arises. 2. Policy
Considerations
- Two Stage Test: 1.
Relationship of
neighbourhood/proximity?
Prima facie duty of care
arises. 2. Policy
Considerations
- Yuen Kun-Yeu v AG of Hong
Kong [1987] - critical of liberal
interpretation of Anns
- Caparo Industries v Dickman [1990] - three
stage test for establishing a duty of care: 1.
Reasonable Foreseeabiity 2. Proximity 3.
Just, fair and reasonable
- *Three separate distinct
hurdles to be negotiated. Introduced concept of "just, fair and reasonable"
- The duty was to develop "incrementally" by
analogy to other estd cases
- The duty was to develop "incrementally" by
analogy to other estd cases
- *Three separate distinct
hurdles to be negotiated. Introduced concept of "just, fair and reasonable"
- Ward v McMaster & Louth Co Co [1988] -
McCarthy J of the SC appeared to reject
concept of incrementalism and favoured
approach based on
foreseeability/proximity/policy
- Glencar Exploration v Mayo Co Co [2002]
- Keane CJ of the Supreme Court introduced concept of "just,
fair and reasonable" into the equation. Adopted incrementalism
- Breslin v Corcoran [2003] - Glencar approved
- Keane CJ of the Supreme Court introduced concept of "just,
fair and reasonable" into the equation. Adopted incrementalism
Want to create your own Mind Maps for free with GoConqr? Learn more.