reliable paper writing on NEGLIGENCE (1) – the Duty of Care law paper

Negligence problem

 

Max lived next door to the Newtown Leisure Centre plc. The centre was having a new extension built by Murphy Ltd, a construction company. The area under construction extended almost to the boundary with Max’s property.  While Max was in his conservatory, a large section of the building under construction next door crashed on to it causing the glass to shatter, and Max was buried under rubble and was quite badly injured. He was pulled out of the rubble and put in an ambulance. However the ambulance broke down on the way to hospital as it had been poorly serviced. This meant that by the time Max reached hospital his condition had become worse.  In hospital he received the wrong medical treatment. He has now recovered, but could not work for six months. Max would now like to bring a legal claim against in respect of his injuries and loss of earnings.

 

By explaining the law of negligence and applying it to the scenario: Discuss how the general law of negligence could be applied to Max’s claim.

 

The duty of care

 

This is the first step in proving negligence:

1 How has it been defined?

 

2 In which cases was it defined and has the definition changed?

 

3 How was the Caparo case significant in defining the concept of a duty of care?

 

4 Name one case which held that a duty of care was not owed, and explain the situation involved in the case.

 

5 To what extent is a duty of care owed for a negligent act that causes a financial loss to the claimant?

 

For the above scenario:

 

1 Analyse the above scenario to decide who might owe a duty of care to Max.

 

2 Refer to two case law examples to back your argument for each duty that you suggest might be owed to Max.

 

3 Explain how these cases back your argument – or explain any cases that might back an argument that a duty is not owed to Max.

 

Seminar reading

 

1 Legal Aspects of Business custom book – see:

Chapter 12 (introduction to law of torts), Chapter 13 (tort of negligence) – pages 288-305 and also relevant case extracts (see below).

 

Please note: The following journal articles can be accessed through the Library Search option. Type ”New Law Journal” into the box, click on the relevant search result and then log in through the resource (eg Lexis Library) to access the article.

 

“Personal Injury – Snail Trail” – Keith Patten

New Law Journal

162 NLJ 643

11^th May 2012

(Eighty years on, Keith Patten traces the legacy of Donoghue v Stevenson)

 

“The sliding snail” – Jon Holbrook

New Law Journal

157 NLJ 168

2 February 2007

(Negligence has changed since Donoghue v Stevenson—and not for the better, argues Jon Holbrook).

 

“Personal Injury: Sliding Away” – Keith Patten

New Law Journal

161 NLJ 1124

12^th August 2011

(Keith Patten observes the move away from compensation for claimants who were in part liable for their injury)

 

Stop or go? – Ruth Winterbottom

New Law Journal

156 NLJ 67

13 January 2006

(Ruth Winterbottom explains why a Court of Appeal decision in favour of motorists could have wider implications for the law of negligence).

 

In relation to the questions above you should look in particular at the following cases (unless indicated otherwise, cases are in custom text book).

 

Donoghue v Stevenson [1932]  (pages 289-90)

 

Dorset Yacht Co v Home Office [1970] (page 300)

 

Anns v London Borough of Merton [1977] (page 291)

 

Caparo Industries plc v Dickman (pages 291-2))

 

Haley v LEB (pages 292-3)

 

Bourhill v Young (page 293)

 

Hill v Chief Constable of West Yorks (page 295)

 

Murphy v Brentwood [1990] (not in custom book)

 

Spartan Steel v Martin [1973] (page 304))

 

Junior Books v Veitchi [1983] (not in custom book)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

SEMINAR 3: NEGLIGENCE (2) – Other aspects

 

Negligence problem

 

Max lived next door to the Newtown Leisure Centre plc. The centre was having a new extension built by Murphy Ltd, a construction company. The area under construction extended almost to the boundary with Max’s property.  While Max was in his conservatory, a large section of the building under construction next door crashed on to it causing the glass to shatter, and Max was buried under rubble and was quite badly injured. He was pulled out of the rubble and put in an ambulance. However the ambulance broke down on the way to hospital as it had been poorly serviced. This meant that by the time Max reached hospital his condition had become worse.  In hospital he received the wrong medical treatment. He has now recovered, but could not work for six months. Max would now like to bring a legal claim against in respect of his injuries and loss of earnings.

 

By explaining the law of negligence and applying it to the scenario: Discuss how the general law of negligence could be applied to Max’s claim.

 

Breach of duty

 

This is the second step in proving negligence.

1 Explain the standard of care expected of someone if their actions are not to be seen as negligent.

 

2 Which case examples can be used to show whether someone has fallen below the expected standard of care (mention 2 or 3). In the examples you mention, what indicated whether the defendant had, or had not, been negligent?

 

Causation

 

3 Explain how this is significant in proving negligence and refer to a case example.

 

Remoteness

 

4 Explain how this is significant in proving negligence and refer to a case example.

 

 

 

 

Egg shell skull principle

 

5 Explain how this can affect a negligence claim and refer to a case example.

 

Defences

 

6 What defences can a defendant argue in a negligence claim and how can they affect the outcome. Refer to one case example.

 

Burden of proof (i.e. who has to prove negligence)

 

7 What is the burden of proof in a negligence claim and in what situation can this be reversed? Refer to one case example.

 

For the above scenario:

 

1 Analyse the above scenario to decide how the above aspects could apply to Max’s claim (this should be related to the analysis last week on “duty of care”).

 

2 Use the case law examples in relation to the aspects listed above to back your arguments as to how each of the above issues could apply to Max.

 

3 Explain how these cases back your argument – or explain any cases that might back an argument that Max will not succeed in his claim.

 

 

Seminar reading

 

1 Legal Aspects of Business custom book – see:

 

Chapter 13 pages 312-339

Chapter 14 pages  343-345 and 350-353

 

2 “The sliding snail” – Jon Holbrook (New Law Journal 157 NLJ 168 – 2 February 2007) (available through InfoLinx – Law database – Lexis Library).

 

3 “Personal Injury: Child’s Play” – Robert Weir (NLJ  159 NLJ 729 – 22 May 2009)

 

Is this the question you were looking for? If so, place your order here to get started!