Tort Law Liability Quiz

Podcast

Play an AI-generated podcast conversation about this lesson

Questions and Answers

Which scenario best illustrates the exception of 'Creation of danger'?

A homeowner neglects to repair a broken fence, allowing a neighbor's child to wander onto their property.

A restaurant manager fails to serve food in a safe manner, which leads to customer illness.

A property owner leaves a swimming pool uncovered, creating a risk for neighborhood children. (correct)

A driver exits their car but fails to turn off the engine, allowing potential thieves to steal it.

In which case was liability established due to the defendant creating a source of danger?

Smith v Littlewoods, where squatters caused a fire due to the owner's negligence.

Haynes v Harwood, where unattended horses were exploited by a third party.

Capital & Counties v Hampshire CC, where firefighters turned off sprinklers causing damage. (correct)

Topp v London Country Bus, where joyriders took an unattended bus.

What are the two main criteria for establishing a 'Voluntary assumption of responsibility'?

D's knowledge of C's situation and the foreseeability of harm.

D's assumption of responsibility to C and C's reliance on that responsibility. (correct)

D's professional training and C's explicit request for help.

C's past experiences with D and D's legal obligations to C.

Which of the following is NOT a situation where liability for omission is typically applied?

A firefighter neglects to intervene at a fire scene while ensuring the safety of the public. Signup and view all the answers

In the case of Topp v London Country Bus, why was there no liability established for leaving the bus unattended?

The action did not create a source of danger that was foreseeable. Signup and view all the answers

What is a key reason why the courts did not impose liability in Barrett v MOD?

D did not have a voluntary assumption of responsibility until after C's collapse. Signup and view all the answers

In Kent v Griffiths, what element was crucial in establishing the ambulance service's liability?

There was a voluntary assumption of responsibility when the 999 call was accepted. Signup and view all the answers

What distinguishes the Home Office v Dorset Yacht Co case from typical negligence cases involving third parties?

There was a direct duty of care because D had control over the juveniles. Signup and view all the answers

In the case of Reeves v Metropolitan Police Commissioner, what aspect of the relationship was critical in establishing duty of care?

The relationship was considered protective, placing obligations on D. Signup and view all the answers

What was established in the ruling of Rushbond plc v JS Design Partnership LLP regarding the actions of D?

D was considered to have increased the risk of harm through negligent actions. Signup and view all the answers

What is the overarching principle regarding public authorities in Robinson v CC of West Yorkshire?

Public authorities are generally treated the same as private individuals concerning tort liability. Signup and view all the answers

In Kent v Griffiths (2001), what factor led the court to impose a duty of care?

The assumption of responsibility by the ambulance service Signup and view all the answers

What was the basis for the court's decision in ABC v St George's Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust regarding duty of care?

The capacity for incrementalism to apply in this case was limited Signup and view all the answers

In Hill v CC of West Yorkshire Police (1989), what key reason did the court provide for not imposing a duty of care?

The serial killer was not in custody at the time Signup and view all the answers

Brooks v Metropolitan Police Commissioner (2005) reinforced which main principle regarding police duties?

Outrageous negligence is necessary to override established policy Signup and view all the answers

What was a crucial consideration in Van Colle v CC of Hertfordshire Police regarding duty of care?

The presence of immediate threat to life was not established Signup and view all the answers

In Michael v CC of South Wales Police (2015), what factor led to the absence of duty of care?

The transfer process of the emergency call downgraded its urgency Signup and view all the answers

In Robinson v CC of West Yorkshire Police (2018), what was a key legal distinction made regarding duty of care?

Public authorities are subject to the same duty of care as individuals Signup and view all the answers

What is one of the general rules regarding non-justiciable matters in negligence claims?

Non-justiciable matters are immune from legal scrutiny Signup and view all the answers

What distinguishes a primary victim from a secondary victim in terms of duty of care?

A primary victim must have been in actual danger or reasonably believed they were in danger. Signup and view all the answers

In the case of Page v Smith, what key concept allows the establishment of duty of care irrespective of the foreseeability of psychiatric harm?

The egg-shell skull principle. Signup and view all the answers

Which of the following cases does NOT support the view that rescuers can be considered primary victims?

Grieves v FT Everard & Sons Ltd. Signup and view all the answers

What criteria did the court establish in CJD Litigation regarding plaintiffs claiming to be primary victims based on fear of future injury?

Close proximity and foreseeability that a normal person would suffer injury is necessary. Signup and view all the answers

In Monk v Harrington, what was the key reason the court denied the claim for duty of care?

C's beliefs about responsibility were deemed unreasonable. Signup and view all the answers

In Tindall v Chief Constable of Thames Valley (2022), why was no duty of care owed to the victim who died on the ice?

The police did not make the situation worse. Signup and view all the answers

What is one reason that rescuers do not typically fall under the principle of volenti non-fit injuria?

They act to rescue persons endangered by D's negligence. Signup and view all the answers

What is the primary principle applied to determine if public authorities owe a duty of care in cases of positive acts?

Ordinary principles of negligence applicable to private individuals Signup and view all the answers

In Ogwo v Taylor (1988), what key requirement was satisfied that resulted in a duty of care being established?

There was foreseeability of risk involved in the rescue. Signup and view all the answers

Under what conditions does the omissions rule apply to public authorities similar to private individuals?

When specific exceptions for omissions arise Signup and view all the answers

What was a major policy concern in McKay v Essex AHA (1982) regarding the claim for damages due to being born disabled?

Violation of the sanctity of human life. Signup and view all the answers

Which case highlighted that the mere existence of a statutory duty does not generate a common-law duty of care?

Tindall v Chief Constable of Thames Valley Signup and view all the answers

Which of the following best describes the courts' position on cases involving omissions as seen in the differing views about Caparo?

Courts often fuse omissions exceptions with Caparo/policy considerations. Signup and view all the answers

What distinguishes Haynes v Harwood (1935) in establishing duty of care to a rescuer?

The foreseeability of the rescuer’s actions. Signup and view all the answers

In Barrett v Enfield LBC, why was the local authority deemed to owe a duty of care to the child?

They had assumed responsibility towards the child Signup and view all the answers

Which policy argument was significant in Mitchell v Glasgow City Council when determining duty of care?

It may lead to defensive actions by local authorities Signup and view all the answers

What was a significant outcome of Rees v Darlington Memorial Healthcare Trust (2004) regarding claims for wrongful life?

Compensation limited to infringements on reproductive autonomy. Signup and view all the answers

What was the outcome of the case Stovin v Wise regarding the duty of care of public authorities?

No duty of care was found based on the omissions principle Signup and view all the answers

What principle underlies the courts' decision in Baker v T.E. Hopkins (1959) about the duty of care owed to rescuers?

Rescuer actions should be foreseeable and reasonable. Signup and view all the answers

What was a significant factor in the Phelps v Hillingdon LBC case for establishing duty of care?

Individual staff members assumed responsibility Signup and view all the answers

In the context of omissions, which case exemplifies the argument against police liability based on policy considerations?

Hill v CC of West Yorkshire Signup and view all the answers

In Capital & Counties v Hampshire CC, what was the basis for the court finding a duty of care owed by the fire services?

The fire service's actions directly worsened the situation Signup and view all the answers

Study Notes

Omissions

Pure omission: Failure to act, not interpreted as doing an act defectively. Confirmed in Smith v Littlewoods and Rushbond plc v JS Design Partnership LLP. A positive act worsening the situation negates pure omission.
Exceptions to pure omission rule (Robinson v Chief Constable of West Yorkshire):

Exception 1: Creation of Danger
- Definition: D creates a danger that a third party reasonably could exploit, causing damage.
- Example (Smith v Littlewoods): Owner of empty property did not have a duty for fire started by squatters.
- Example (Haynes v Harwood): Unattended horses created foreseeable danger.
- Example (Topp v London Country Bus): Leaving a bus unattended did not create a danger.
- Example (Capital & Counties v Hampshire CC): Fire brigade turning off sprinklers, making the situation worse, created a duty.
Exception 2: Voluntary Assumption of Responsibility
- Definition: D assumes responsibility for C, and C relies on that responsibility to their detriment.
- Example (Michael v CC of South Wales Police): Police did not assume responsibility for woman's call.
- Example (Barrett v MOD): Army officer assuming responsibility for injured soldier.
- Example (Stansbie v Troman): Decorator assuming responsibility for protecting property while absent.
- Example (Swinney v CC Northumbria Police): Police assuming responsibility for informant's safety.
- Example (Kent v Griffiths): Ambulance service assuming responsibility for patient during emergency call.
Exception 3: 3rd Party Under Care and Control of D
- Definition: D has control over a third party who causes damage.
- Example (Home Office v Dorset Yacht Co): Home Office in charge of juveniles who caused damage.
- Example (Carmarthenshire CC v Lewis): School responsible for a child who caused an accident.
Exception 4: Protective Relationship with Victim
- Definition: D has a protective relationship with C allowing for reliance on protection.
- Example (Barnes v Hampshire CC): School released a child early with no parent and accident occurred.
- **Example (Reeves v Metropolitan Police Commissioner) Prison and inmate relationship
Exception 5: Making Things Worse
- Definition: D's involvement made a situation worse, thus eliminating pure omission.
- Example (Rushbond plc v JS Design Partnership LLP): Security guard negatively impacting situation.

Public Authorities

General rule (Robinson v CC of West Yorkshire): Public authorities are generally liable in the same manner as private individuals, applying the normal principles of negligence. Statutory duties do not automatically create common law duties.
Positive acts: Public authorities owe a duty of care to avoid harm caused by positive actions, similar to private individuals.
Omissions: Pure omissions are generally not actionable for public authorities, unless exceptions apply.
Policy considerations: Should be used only in novel situations, considering incremental changes to the law.
Categories: Specific examples of negligence cases involving various public authorities (social services, education, highway, fire, police, health). Each case is fact-dependent.

Miscellaneous Categories

Rescuers: Public authorities and ordinary citizens can owe a duty to rescuers. Duty exists for rescuers acting reasonably in response to danger created by D's negligence. For rescuer's to be able to claim damages, they were acting reasonably and naturally.
Unborn Child/Wrongful Life: Generally, no duty is owed to prevent birth, but claims for the additional costs associated with a disabled child are possible.

Nervous Shock/Psychiatric Harm

Primary victims: Those in actual or perceived danger due to negligence. Duty exists if physical harm is foreseeable. Egg-shell skull rule applies.
Secondary victims: Those not in danger but harmed by witnessing the injury or death of another. Duty based on foreseeability, familial relationship, proximity, and means of observation. Alcock factors are to be considered.
Different characteristics: Secondary victims' rights to compensation under Alcock. Egg-shell skull principle does not always apply.

Studying That Suits You

Use AI to generate personalized quizzes and flashcards to suit your learning preferences.

Description

Test your knowledge on key principles of tort law, including the creation of danger, voluntary assumption of responsibility, and case precedents. Explore significant cases such as Topp v London Country Bus and Kent v Griffiths to understand how liability is established. This quiz will help clarify complex legal concepts and their practical applications.