Tort Law Duty Quiz

A legal concept where a person or entity is held responsible for harm caused due to their carelessness or failure to act with reasonable care.

The legal responsibility to take care and avoid causing harm to another person.

An action or omission that falls below the standard of care expected from a reasonable person in a similar situation.

The harm or injury that results from a breach of duty.

The claimant's right to seek compensation for damages suffered due to negligence.

A financial award to compensate a claimant for their injuries, losses, and expenses.

The party responsible for causing the harm or damage due to negligence.

A type of legal relationship where one party has a responsibility to act in a particular way towards the other party due to their connection.

A legal relationship where a solicitor has a duty to act in the best interests of their client and provide competent legal advice.

A legal relationship where a doctor has a duty to provide their patients with appropriate medical care and treat them with skill and care.

A legal relationship where drivers have a duty to drive safely and take reasonable care to avoid causing harm to other road users.

A legal relationship where an employer has a duty to provide their employees with a safe working environment and take reasonable care of their health and safety.

The legal principle that courts can recognize new duty situations based on evolving social and political contexts.

A test used by courts to determine whether a duty of care exists in a new situation where there is no established precedent.

A legal standard used to determine whether a defendant has breached their duty of care by failing to act as a reasonably prudent person would in similar circumstances.

In negligence cases, a legal test used to determine if a duty of care exists. It involves determining whether the harm was foreseeable, the parties had a close relationship, and it's fair, just and reasonable to impose liability.

A legal principle established in the Caparo case, which states that a duty of care will only be imposed in novel situations if it is fair, just and reasonable to do so.

The degree of closeness or connection between parties in a negligence case. A close relationship is needed to establish a duty of care.

The likelihood of the harm happening. This element is crucial for establishing a duty of care in negligence cases.

In negligence cases, policy considerations can influence whether a duty of care exists, even if the foreseeability and proximity tests are met.

A legal principle where a person can be held responsible for not taking action to prevent harm, even if they didn't directly cause the harm.

A legal principle where a person is not usually held responsible for failing to help someone in danger, even if they could have.

The legal exception to the general rule of no duty to rescue, arising when a defendant assumes a responsibility for the safety of another.

The legal principle that one can be held responsible for both actions that cause harm and failures to act that cause harm.

A landmark case in which the Home Office was held liable for the failure of their employees to prevent damage caused by borstal boys.

A case where the Ministry of Defence was held liable for the death of a naval airman due to their employees' failure to act.

The legal principle where a person can be held responsible for the actions of others if they are in a position of authority or control.

A situation where the defendant's actions, even if not directly causing the harm, still created the conditions that allowed the harm to occur.

The legal principle that a person must act reasonably to prevent harm to others, even if they didn't directly cause the danger.

The 'neighbour principle' from Donoghue v Stevenson, extended to include liability for both acts and omissions.

A legal principle that determines who is responsible for a certain loss or damage, based on the actions or omissions of the responsible party.

When a court completely dismisses a claim because the case lacks legal foundation. This often happens when a duty of care isn't established between parties.

Legal precedents set by previous court decisions are used to help judges make decisions in similar cases. These decisions establish legal guidelines.

Carefully reading a legal judgment is crucial for understanding the reasoning and logic behind it, especially when dealing with the duty of care.

The landmark case that established the foundation for duty of care in negligence law. It concerned a consumer harmed by a defective product.

The narrow ratio of Donoghue v Stevenson establishes a duty of care specifically between manufacturers and consumers of products.

A fundamental principle stating that you owe a duty of care to anyone who might be affected by your actions, as long as you can reasonably foresee their presence.

A legal concept that emphasizes the importance of understanding how a decision in one case can affect a vast group of people in similar situations.