null
US
Sign In
Sign Up for Free
Sign Up
We have detected that Javascript is not enabled in your browser. The dynamic nature of our site means that Javascript must be enabled to function properly. Please read our
terms and conditions
for more information.
Next up
Copy and Edit
You need to log in to complete this action!
Register for Free
292158
Has there been a breach in the duty of care?
Description
CIVIL LAW (TORT OF NEGLIGENCE) Mind Map on Has there been a breach in the duty of care?, created by elissamansley on 21/10/2013.
No tags specified
civil law
tort of negligence
civil law
tort of negligence
Mind Map by
elissamansley
, updated more than 1 year ago
More
Less
Created by
elissamansley
about 11 years ago
42
1
0
Resource summary
Has there been a breach in the duty of care?
1. What is the standard of care?
This is the standard of the REASONABLE PERSON in the same circumstances
As laid out in Blyth V Proprieters of Birmingham Water Works
This is an OBJECTIVE standard
EXCEPTIONS TO THE REASONABLE PERSON STANDARD:
LEARNERS: should be driving with the same standard of care of that of an experienced driver as in NETTLESHIP V WESTON
CHILDREN (up to 18): are judged against other children of the same age as in MULLIN V RICHARDS
PROFESSIONALS (people with a higher skill set than that of the reasonable person and thererfore have a higher standard)
THE BOLAM TEST states that it doesn't matter if there is a divded medical opinion as long as there is a body of similar professionals who support
THE BOLITHO TEST says that it is ultimately up to the courts to decide whether or not the medical opinion will withstand logical analysis
2. Have the defendants actions caused them to fall below the standard?
RISK FACTORS
REASONABLY FORESEEABLE
You are not expected to take precautions against a risk which is not foreseeable at that time
ROE V MINISTRY OF HEALTH
MAGNITUDE OF RISK
You are not usually expected to go to great lengths to prevent a harm when there is a very slight chance of it happening
BOLTON V STONE
POTENTIAL HARM
Where the risk seems small but the potential harm is great, then you are expected to deal with it
PARIS V STEPNEY BOROUGH COUNCIL
COST AND PRACTICALITY
LATIMER V AEC
You are only supposed to do what is reasonable to prevent harm
SOCIALLY JUSTIFIED
Sometimes it acceptable to run a risk if the action is justified (an emergency situation)
WATT V HERTFORDSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL
Show full summary
Hide full summary
Want to create your own
Mind Maps
for
free
with GoConqr?
Learn more
.
Similar
Omissions
ameliathorn0325
FREE CONSENT
kharul_arifah
Copyright
Luzelda Maré
Civil Law
Ben Davis
Civil Courts Quiz
aimej.sullivan
GCSE Law Unit 2
Ben Davis
Duty of care
elissamansley
Civil Law Quiz
Sean Thomson
Our Legal System
celandreth
Civil Law - Torts
Sarah Levey
Criminal + Civil Law ch. 5-8
Natasha Janevska
Browse Library