Podcast
Questions and Answers
Which of the following is most accurate regarding the standard of care in negligence cases?
Which of the following is most accurate regarding the standard of care in negligence cases?
- It is subjective, based on the defendant's personal beliefs.
- It's based on what the pursuer believes is reasonable.
- It is a fixed standard that applies uniformly across all situations.
- It is objective, based on what a reasonably prudent person would do under similar circumstances. (correct)
In determining whether a duty of care has been breached, what role does the degree of risk play?
In determining whether a duty of care has been breached, what role does the degree of risk play?
- The degree of care required varies inversely with the risk involved.
- Risk is not considered when determining the breach of a duty of care.
- The required degree of care remains constant, irrespective of the risk involved.
- The degree of care required varies directly with the risk involved. (correct)
In the context of learner drivers, how is the standard of care typically applied?
In the context of learner drivers, how is the standard of care typically applied?
- Learner drivers are held to a lower standard of care than experienced drivers.
- Learner drivers are held to the same standard of care as experienced drivers. (correct)
- Learner drivers are held to a higher standard of care than experienced drivers.
- The standard of care for learner drivers depends on the number of hours they have practiced.
In assessing the standard of care, what must a pursuer primarily establish?
In assessing the standard of care, what must a pursuer primarily establish?
Which two factors are most critical when considering the standard of care?
Which two factors are most critical when considering the standard of care?
In the context of 'calculus of risk', what do the cases of Bolton v Stone and Lamond v Glasgow Corporation primarily illustrate?
In the context of 'calculus of risk', what do the cases of Bolton v Stone and Lamond v Glasgow Corporation primarily illustrate?
What is the central issue addressed in Paris v Stepney BC and St George v Home Office regarding the standard of care?
What is the central issue addressed in Paris v Stepney BC and St George v Home Office regarding the standard of care?
When assessing reasonable precautions, what factor is the case of Latimer v AEC Ltd most relevant to?
When assessing reasonable precautions, what factor is the case of Latimer v AEC Ltd most relevant to?
In cases involving children, what considerations are most relevant to setting the standard of care, as suggested by Harris v Perry and Anderson v Imrie?
In cases involving children, what considerations are most relevant to setting the standard of care, as suggested by Harris v Perry and Anderson v Imrie?
If there is a common or usual practice, how does this affect a negligence claim?
If there is a common or usual practice, how does this affect a negligence claim?
What must an employer do if a common practice is to provide barrier cream but an alternative provision is made?
What must an employer do if a common practice is to provide barrier cream but an alternative provision is made?
What is the key takeaway in understanding breach of duty?
What is the key takeaway in understanding breach of duty?
What legal principle dictates that the action/conduct must have been voluntary to breach a duty?
What legal principle dictates that the action/conduct must have been voluntary to breach a duty?
Which case affirms that to breach a duty, the action/conduct must have been voluntary?
Which case affirms that to breach a duty, the action/conduct must have been voluntary?
If conduct does not meet the standard of care, it can be described as what?
If conduct does not meet the standard of care, it can be described as what?
What happens to the potential precautions that the defender is expected to take as the seriousness of harm is more potential?
What happens to the potential precautions that the defender is expected to take as the seriousness of harm is more potential?
According to the content, what would be considered when determining if riot training could be changed?
According to the content, what would be considered when determining if riot training could be changed?
If someone is undertaking to look after someone's child, but left their child to own devices, what standard of care is in question?
If someone is undertaking to look after someone's child, but left their child to own devices, what standard of care is in question?
Which case is about an employer providing an 'alternative' provision?
Which case is about an employer providing an 'alternative' provision?
What should you now understand according to the content?
What should you now understand according to the content?
Flashcards
Breach of Duty
Breach of Duty
Failure to meet the required standard of behavior expected of a reasonable person under similar circumstances.
Voluntary Action
Voluntary Action
States that to breach a duty, the action/conduct must have been voluntary.
Falling Short
Falling Short
Breach occurs when conduct 'falls short' of the standard of care expected in a given situation.
Objective Standard
Objective Standard
Signup and view all the flashcards
Varying Standard
Varying Standard
Signup and view all the flashcards
Pursuer's Responsibility
Pursuer's Responsibility
Signup and view all the flashcards
Relevant Considerations
Relevant Considerations
Signup and view all the flashcards
Probability of Injury
Probability of Injury
Signup and view all the flashcards
Magnitude of Harm
Magnitude of Harm
Signup and view all the flashcards
Reasonable Precautions
Reasonable Precautions
Signup and view all the flashcards
Setting the Standard
Setting the Standard
Signup and view all the flashcards
Common Practice
Common Practice
Signup and view all the flashcards
Study Notes
Breach of Duty - Standard of Care
- Conduct must constitute negligence and breach
- To breach a duty the action/conduct must be voluntary: Waugh v James K Allan Ltd 1964 SC(HL) 102
- Duty is breached when conduct 'falls short' of the standard of care
- Standard is objective
- The standard is that of the 'ordinary reasonable person in the circumstances of the defender'
- "There is no absolute standard, but it may be said generally that the degree of care required varies directly with the risk involved.": Muir v Glasgow Corporation 1943 SC (HL) 3
- Same standard as that of an experienced driver applies to learner drivers: Nettleship v Weston [1971] 2 QB 691
Standard of Care: Relevant Considerations
- Onus on pursuer to establish the standard of care
- Must consider probability of injury and potential magnitude of harm
- Factors include: Risk/probability of accident, magnitude of possible harm, and practicality and cost of 'Reasonable' precautions
- Bolton v Stone 1951 AC 850 and Lamond v Glasgow Corporation 1968 SLT 951 illustrate the 'calculus of risk' approach
Probability of Injury
- An occurrence of a cricket ball being struck out of ground 6 times in 30 years is considered
- Occurrences like an average of 6,000 golf balls played onto footpaths are considered
- The duty to guard and foreseeability are key
Potential Magnitude of Harm
- If there is a known vulnerability of the pursuer the magnitude of harm is altered: Paris v Stepney BC [1951] AC 367; St George v Home Office [2008] EWCA Civ 1068
- The care standard should be higher than normal
- More serious the potential harm, the more precautions the defender is expected to take
Reasonable Precautions
- What is reasonable is gauged on a case by case basis
- Cases include Brisco v SofS for Scotland 1997 SC 14; Latimer v AEC Ltd [1953] AC 643 and Collins v First Quench Retailing Ltd 2003 SLT 220
- "Riot training" and it's realistic implications need to be considered
- The risk of exposure to relatively 'small' danger needs to be considered
- Allowing 'lone working' – where there is a foreseeable risk is negligence on part of employer
Setting the Standard
- Setting the standard depends on if the defender did what he ought not, to comply with the duty
- Cases include Harris v Perry [2008] EWCA Civ 907 and Anderson v Imrie [2018] CSIH 18
- The standard of care depends on foreseeability
Common/Usual Practice
- Common practice should be followed
- The is is not adopted - is it proof of Negligence?
- Case example: Brown v Rolls Royce 1960 SC (HL) 22
- An employer must do what a ‘reasonable' employer would have done
- Topics covered include: the standard of care, breach of duty of care, legal significance of breaching a duty of care, and the 'professional standard of care'
Studying That Suits You
Use AI to generate personalized quizzes and flashcards to suit your learning preferences.
