Category: Negligence

Fleet v Wrexham Maelor Hospital NHS Trust: CA 17 Feb 1998

The plaintiff appealed refusal of her claim for damages having slipped in the snow at work in the grounds of the hospital.
Held: The appeal was dismissed. ‘It is an inescapable fact of life that in this country sudden snow falls will, from time to time, make walking hazardous. It is undoubtedly the duty of the hospital to have a snow clearance plan or policy to combat those dangers for persons walking in its grounds, so far as is reasonably practicable, but no amount of policy or planning will guarantee freedom from hazard after the sudden fall of a blanket of snow, especially if the snow is continuing to fall. ‘

Citations:

[1998] EWCA Civ 256

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Negligence, Personal Injury

Updated: 14 November 2022; Ref: scu.143734

Probert v Moore: QBD 9 Aug 2012

The claimant, a 13 year old girl, was severely injured walking along the carriageway on a 60mph unlit road at 5:00pm on a December day. A hedgerow obliged her to walk in the road. The defendant driver said that she was contibutorily negligent in that it was dark and she was walking on the left hand side of the road and had not been wearing a high visibility jacket. The expert evidence suggested he had been driving at less than 45mph.
Held: She was not contributorily negligent: ‘an ordinary 13 year old should not be expected to consider taking the same level of precautions as an adult. It would be asking too much of her to say that she should not have started to walk home at all, waited for her mother or accepted lift, or should not have started to walk home without borrowing a high visibility jacket, reflective markings or torch from the stables. In my view those actions for a child of her age would have been a paragon of prudence.’

Judges:

Pittaway QC J

Citations:

[2012] EWHC 2324 (QB)

Links:

Bailii

Citing:

Cited – Gough v Thorne CA 1966
The court was asked as to the standard of duty of care expected of a child. Salmon LJ said: ‘The question as to whether the Plaintiff can be said to have been guilty of contributory negligence depends on whether any ordinary child of 13 can be . .
Cited – Powell v Phillips CA 1972
After a dance, the plaintiff, a girl of nineteen, was walking along the pavement of a poorly lit street at about 10.45 p.m. with an escort. The pavement was covered with snow and slush. From time to time, they had to step off it and walked in the . .
Cited – Toropdar v D QBD 20-Mar-2009
The claimant car driver sought a declaration that he was not responsible for an accident. He had been driving along when the 10 year old boy ran out into his path suffering catastrophic brain injury.
Held: ‘on the assumption that Mr Toropdar . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Negligence, Personal Injury

Updated: 14 November 2022; Ref: scu.471193

Santander UK Plc v Keeper of The Registers of Scotland: SCS 8 Feb 2013

Opinion – The claimant objected that the respondent had acted upon a forged deed discharging their registered legal charge. The pursuer said that the registration had been allowed negligently.

Judges:

Lord Boyd of Duncansby

Citations:

[2013] ScotCS CSOH – 24

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

Scotland

Registered Land, Negligence

Updated: 14 November 2022; Ref: scu.470960

AIB Group (UK) Plc v Mark Redler and Co Solicitors: CA 8 Feb 2013

The defendant firm of solicitors had acted for the claimants under instructions to secure a first charge over the secured property. They failed to secure the discharge of the existing first charge, causing losses. AIB asserted breach of trust.
Held: The bank’s appeal failed. However, the judge was wrong to treat the breach of trust as limited to that part of the mortgage advance which was paid to the borrowers instead of being used to discharge their liability to Barclays on the second account. the solicitors had no authority to release any part of the funds advanced by the bank unless and until they had a redemption statement from Barclays coupled with an appropriate undertaking which enabled them to be sure that they would be able on completion to register the bank’s charge as a first charge over the property.
Where the breach of trust occurred in the context of a commercial transaction such as the present, Target Holdings established that equitable principles of compensation ‘although not employing precisely the same rules of causation and remoteness as the common law, do have the capacity to recognise what loss the beneficiary has actually suffered from the breach of trust and to base the compensation recoverable on a proper causal connection between the breach and the eventual loss’.
Given the law, and, on the facts, Patten LJ said: ‘If one asks as at the date of trial and with the benefit of hindsight what loss AIB has suffered then the answer is that it has enjoyed less security for its loan than would have been the case had there been no breach of trust. If [the solicitors] had obtained from Barclays a proper redemption statement, coupled with an undertaking to apply the sums specified in the statement in satisfaction of the existing mortgage, then the transaction would have proceeded to complete and AIB could have obtained a first legal mortgage over the Sondhis’ property. But although that did not happen, AIB did obtain a valid mortgage from the Sondhis which they were eventually able to register as a second charge and use to recover part of their loan from the proceeds of the security in priority to the Sondhis’ other creditors. Even had there been no such mortgage they would have been subrogated to Barclays’ first charge insofar as they discharged part of the Sondhis’ indebtedness by the payment of the andpound;1.2m. In my view all of these are matters to be taken into account in considering what loss has ultimately been caused by the solicitors’ breach of trust. In the light of the judge’s findings it is not open to AIB to contend that but for the breach of trust it simply would have asked for its money back.’

Judges:

Arden, Sullivan and Patten LJJ

Citations:

[2013] EWCA Civ 45

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – AIB Group (UK) Plc v Mark Redler and Co (A Firm) ChD 23-Jan-2012
The claimant bank sought damages from the defendant solicitors, saying that they had paid on mortgage advance moneys but failed to deliver as promised and required, a first mortgage over the property purchased. The solicitors had failed to discharge . .
Cited – Target Holdings Ltd v Redferns (A Firm) and Another HL 21-Jul-1995
The defendant solicitors had acted for a purchaser, Crowngate, which had agreed to buy a property from a company called Mirage for andpound;775,000. Crowngate had arranged however that the property would first be passed through a chain of two . .

Cited by:

At CA – AIB Group (UK) Plc v Mark Redler and Co Solicitors SC 5-Nov-2014
Bank not to recover more than its losses
The court was asked as to the remedy available to the appellant bank against the respondent, a firm of solicitors, for breach of the solicitors’ custodial duties in respect of money entrusted to them for the purpose of completing a loan which was to . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Negligence, Equity, Damages

Updated: 14 November 2022; Ref: scu.470899

Powell and Another v Boldaz and others: CA 1 Jul 1997

The plaintiff’s son aged 10 died of Addison’s Disease which had not been diagnosed. An action against the Health Authority was settled. The parents then brought an action against 5 doctors in their local GP Practice in relation to matters that had taken place post death. The allegations included conspiracy to injure by unlawful means.
Held: An unlawful act actionable at the suit of the claimant was a necessary ingredient of unlawful means conspiracy.
No duty of care was owed because the element of proximity was lacking.
Stuart-Smith LJ said: ‘I propose to consider first whether a sufficient relationship of proximity existed. It must be appreciated that prior to April 17th 1990 although the Plaintiffs were patients of the Defendants in the sense that they were on their register, the only patient who was seeking medical advice and treatment was Robert. It was to him that the Defendants owed a duty of care. The discharge of that duty in the case of a young child will often involve giving advice and instruction to the parents so that they can administer the appropriate medication, observe relevant symptoms and seek further medical assistance if need be. In giving such advice, the Doctor obviously owes a duty to be careful. It was to him [the child] that the defendants owed a duty of care. The discharge of that duty in the case of a young child will often involve giving advice and instruction to the parents so that they can administer the appropriate medication, observe relevant symptoms and seek further medical assistance if need be. In giving such advice, the doctor obviously owes a duty to be careful. But the duty is owed to the child, not to the parents.’ and ‘After the death, the defendants may owe the plaintiffs a duty of care; but this depends upon whether they are called upon, or undertake, to treat them as patients.’

Judges:

Stuart-Smith LJ, Morritt LJ and Shiemann LJ

Citations:

[1997] EWCA Civ 2002, [1998] Lloyds Rep Med 116, [1997] 39 BMLR 35

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Law Reform (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1934, Fatal Accidents Act 1978

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Applied – Caparo Industries Plc v Dickman and others HL 8-Feb-1990
Limitation of Loss from Negligent Mis-statement
The plaintiffs sought damages from accountants for negligence. They had acquired shares in a target company and, relying upon the published and audited accounts which overstated the company’s earnings, they purchased further shares.
Held: The . .
Cited – Sidaway v Board of Governors of the Bethlem Royal Hospital and the Maudsley Hospital HL 21-Feb-1985
Explanation of Medical Risks essential
The plaintiff alleged negligence in the failure by a surgeon to disclose or explain to her the risks inherent in the operation which he had advised.
Held: The appeal failed. A mentally competent patient has an absolute right to refuse to . .
Cited – Lonrho Ltd v Shell Petroleum Co Ltd (No 2) HL 1-Apr-1981
No General Liability in Tort for Wrongful Acts
The plaintiff had previously constructed an oil supply pipeline from Beira to Mozambique. After Rhodesia declared unilateral independence, it became a criminal offence to supply to Rhodesia without a licence. The plaintiff ceased supply as required, . .
Cited – Hargreaves v Bretherton 1959
The Plaintiff pleaded that the First Defendant police officer had falsely and maliciously and without justification or excuse committed perjury at the Plaintiff’s trial on charges of criminal offences and that as a result the Plaintiff had been . .
Cited – Marrinan v Vibart CA 1962
The court considered an action in the form an attempt to circumvent the immunity of a witness at civil law by alleging a conspiracy.
Held: The claim was rejected. The court considered the basis of the immunity from action given to witnesses. . .

Cited by:

Cited – AB and others v Leeds Teaching Hospital NHS Trust, Cardiff and Vale NHS Trust QBD 26-Mar-2004
Representative claims were made against the respondents, hospitals, pathologists etc with regard to the removal of organs from deceased children without the informed consent of the parents. They claimed under the tort of wrongful interference.
Binding – Applied – Total Network Sl v Customs and Excise Commissioners CA 31-Jan-2007
The defendants suspected a carousel VAT fraud. The defendants appealed a finding that there was a viable cause of action alleging a ‘conspiracy where the unlawful means alleged is a common law offence of cheating the public revenue’. The defendants . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Health Professions, Negligence, Torts – Other, Health Professions

Updated: 13 November 2022; Ref: scu.142399

Ayres v Odedra: QBD 18 Jan 2013

The claimant sought damages for serious personal injury, saying that the defendant had deliberately or recklessly driven at him as a pedestrian, knocking him over. The defendant had been tried and acquitted of motoring offences. He said that the claimant and his friends were drunk and had pulled down there trousers to insilt him, and had banged on his car. He said that he had tried to escape, but had driven over the claimant.
Held: ‘I do not consider that the claimant can be absolved of all responsibility. He deliberately placed himself in the road in front of the defendant’s car and remained there at a time when he should have known that the traffic lights were likely to change and the defendant would want to move forward. His drunken state and dropped trousers hampered his ability to move freely and at a normal speed out of the path of the defendant’s car. I am satisfied that it was the fact that the claimant was not moving at a normal speed that led the defendant to misjudge the claimant’s position and mistakenly to believe that he could get past the claimant without striking him. In the circumstances, I consider that it is just and equitable to apportion liability 80% to the defendant and 20% to the claimant. ‘

Judges:

Swift DBE J

Citations:

[2013] EWHC 40 (QB)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Law Reform (Contributory Negligence) Act 1945 1(1)

Citing:

Cited – North v TNt Express (UK) Ltd CA 25-May-2001
The claimant, who was drunk and a member of a group of people in a similar condition, asked the defendant, a lorry driver, for a lift. When the defendant refused, the claimant climbed onto the front bumper of the defendant’s lorry, holding on by the . .
Cited – Eagle v Chambers CA 24-Jul-2003
The claimant was severely injured when run down by the defendant driving his car. She was in Blackpool, and drunk and wandering in the highway. The defendant was himself at or near the drink driving limit. She appealed against a finding that she was . .
Cited – Rehill v Rider Holdings Ltd CA 16-May-2012
The claimant had been injured, being hit by the defendant’s bus. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury, Road Traffic, Negligence

Updated: 13 November 2022; Ref: scu.470370

Jackson v Murray and Another: SCS 27 Dec 2012

Extra Division, Inner House. The pursuer, a child, alighted from a school bus, and, on emerging into the road was hit by a car driven by the defender, suffering serious injury. She now appealed against a finding that she was 90% responsible for her injuries.
Held: The Division allowed the pursuer’s appeal and assessed her contributory negligence instead at 70%.

Judges:

Lord Drummond Yound

Citations:

[2012] ScotCS CSIH – 100, 2013 GWD 3-104, [2012] CSIH 100, 2013 Rep LR 30, 2013 SLT 153

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Law Reform (Contributory Negligence) Act 1945

Citing:

At Outer House – Jackson v Murray SCS 14-Jun-2012
Outer House – (Opinion) The pursuer child came out of a school bus and ran into the road behind it, being hit by a car driven by the defender. The court was asked as to the proprotions of responsibility.
Held: The pursuer was 90% responsible. . .

Cited by:

At Inner House – Jackson v Murray and Another SC 18-Feb-2015
Child not entirely free of responsibility
The claimant child, left a school bus and stepped out from behind it into the path of the respondent’s car. She appealed against a finding of 70% contributory negligence.
Held: Her appeal succeeded (Majority, Lord Hodge and Lord Wilson . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Scotland, Personal Injury, Negligence

Updated: 12 November 2022; Ref: scu.468833

Karl Andrew Whyte v Redland Aggregates Limited: CA 27 Nov 1997

The appellant dived into a disused gravel pit and struck his head on an obstruction on the floor of the pit. The Court dismissed his appeal that he was not entitled to damages.
Held: ‘In my judgment, the occupier of land containing or bordered by the river, the seashore, the pond or the gravel pit, does not have to warn of uneven surfaces below the water. Such surfaces are by their nature quite likely to be uneven. Diving where you cannot see the bottom clearly enough to know that it is safe to dive is dangerous unless you have made sure, by reconnaissance or otherwise, that the diving is safe ie. that there is adequate depth at the place where you choose to dive. In those circumstances, the dangers of there being an uneven surface in an area where you cannot plainly see the bottom are too plain to require a specific warning and, accordingly, there is no such duty to warn (see Lord Shaw in Glasgow Corporation v Taylor [1922] 1 AC 44, 60. There was no trap here on the judge’s finding. There was just an uneven surface, as one would expect to find in a disused gravel pit.’

Judges:

Henry LJ

Citations:

[1997] EWCA Civ 2842

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Applied – Glasgow Corporation v Taylor HL 18-Nov-1921
A father brought an action for damages for the death of his son who had eaten poisonous berries growing in one of the defenders’ public parks. The plants were easily accessible from a children’s play area and it was said that the defender had a duty . .

Cited by:

Cited – Tomlinson v Congleton Borough Council and others HL 31-Jul-2003
The claimant dived into a lake, severely injuring himself. The council appealed liability, arguing that it owed him no duty of care under the Act since he was a trespasser. It had placed warning signs to deter swimmers.
Held: The council’s . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Negligence, Personal Injury

Updated: 12 November 2022; Ref: scu.143241

Wills v Entwistle and Spruce: CA 12 Nov 1997

The claimant was a passenger in a car driven by the first defendant. He was injured when the driver turned right at traffic lights, in front of a van approaching. The traffic lights were at green for both vehicles. The question was as to the possible liability of the driver of the van. The judge had found that the first defendant was unlikely to have indicated to turn right, but that the van had accelerated. Had the driver been paying proper attention he could have avoided the accident, and the van driver had been found to be 20% responsible.
Held: There had been no evidence before the judge to found his assessment that thevan had not already entered the junction by the time the first defendant turned across his path. There was therefore no basis for finding contributory negligence on the van driver’s part, and the van driver’s appeal succeeded.

Judges:

Roch, Thorpe, Buxton LJJ

Citations:

[1997] EWCA Civ 2701

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Personal Injury, Road Traffic, Negligence

Updated: 10 November 2022; Ref: scu.143100

Cleightonhills v Bembridge Marine Ltd and Others: TCC 5 Dec 2012

The claimant was very severely injured falling through a grating at premises occupied by his employer, the first defendant. The employer now sought a contribution from those involved in the design and construction of the building.

Judges:

Akenhead J

Citations:

[2012] EWHC 3449 (TCC)

Links:

Bailii

Personal Injury, Negligence

Updated: 09 November 2022; Ref: scu.466563

Griffin v Mersey Regional Ambulance: CA 8 Oct 1997

A driver who had crossed through a green traffic light but had collided with an ambulance was 60 per cent contributorily negligent. He had failed to hear the ambulance, had failed to see it, and had ignored unusal driving of other motorists.
Held: ‘In my judgment, the general approach of the judge below was entirely correct. He rightly identified the duty upon the defendants’ driver crossing this junction against the red light, as a high or heavy one, but equally rightly he recognised a duty of care upon the plaintiff beyond that of merely taking reasonable steps to avoid colliding with any vehicle crossing on red which he happened to see or otherwise be aware of. Rejecting, as I do, the application here of what is suggested to be the absolute rule in favour of traffic crossing a junction on green established in Joseph Eva Ltd v Reeves, it follows that, in my judgment, the appellant’s argument that there was no scope here for any finding of contributory negligence fails.’ The court emphasised that the nature of the duty owed by drivers crossing on green, in circumstances where emergency vehicles are crossing on red, is illuminated by regulation 33(2) of the 1994 Regulations. Simon Brown LJ also referred to rule 76 of the Highway Code providing: ‘Look and listen for ambulances . . or other emergency vehicles with flashing blue lights or sirens. Make room for them to pass (if necessary by moving to the side of the road and stopping) but do not endanger other road users.’

Judges:

Simon Brown LJ, Rober Walker LJ

Citations:

[1997] EWCA Civ 2441, [1998] PIQR 44

Statutes:

Traffic Signs And General Directions Order 1994 (1994 No 1519)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Joseph Eva Ltd v Reeves CA 1938
An accident occurred when a police vehicle went through traffic lights at green, but on the wrong side of the road.
Held: A driver crossing through traffic lights at green owes no duty to traffic entering the crossing in disobedience to the . .
Cited – Director of Public Prosecutions v Harris QBD 16-Mar-1994
The defence of necessity will be available only in exceptional circumstances even for police drivers driving in pursuit of a suspect. The care due from the driver of an emergency vehicle crossing a junction against red lights is specifically . .
Cited – Davis v Hassan 1967
All cases calling for attribution of liaibility where an emergency vehicle is in collision with another vehicle fall to be decided on their own facts. . .

Cited by:

Cited – Purdue v Devon Fire and Rescue Service CA 9-Oct-2002
The claimant was severely injured when, as he emerged through traffic lights as they turned green. He was in a collision with a fire engine driving in response to an emergency call-out. The driver of the fire engine said the claimant should have . .
Cited – Craggy v Chief Constable of Cleveland Police CA 6-Oct-2009
The claimant was driving his fire engine on an emergency call. The defendant’s constable was similarly engaged. It was in the early hours, and they each went through the traffic junction. They crashed and the judge held both drivers negligent to the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury, Road Traffic, Negligence

Updated: 09 November 2022; Ref: scu.142839

Capital and Counties Plc v Hampshire County Council: CA 14 Mar 1997

Consolidation of cases involving question of what duty was owed by a fire service to the owners of buildings.
Whether and if so in what circumstances a fire brigade owes a duty of care to the owner or occupier of premises which are damaged or destroyed by fire.

Judges:

Stuart-Smith, Potter, Judge LJ

Citations:

[1997] EWCA Civ 1247, [1997] QB 1004, [1997] EWCA Civ 3091, [1997] 2 LLR 161, [1997] 2 All ER 865, [1997] 3 WLR 331

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See Also – Church of Jesus Christ Latter-Day Saints v West Yorkshire Fire and Civil Defence and John Munroe (Acrylics) Ltd v London Fire and Civil Defence Authority and others and Digital Equipment Company Ltd v Hampshire County Council and Capital and Counties etc CA 17-Dec-1996
The court made orders for the orderly hearing of the cases which raised interdependent issues. . .

Cited by:

Cited – An Informer v A Chief Constable CA 29-Feb-2012
The claimant appealed against dismissal of his claim for damages against the police. He had provided them with information, but he said that they had acted negligently and in breach of contract causing him financial loss. The officer handling his . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Negligence

Updated: 06 November 2022; Ref: scu.276278

Laceys Footwear (Wholesale) Ltd v Bowler International Freight Ltd and Another: CA 18 Apr 1997

The defendant’s driver had taken a consignment of shoes to Spain, where they were stolen. The plaintiff alleged his gross negligence amounted to ‘wilful misconduct’ so as to disapply an exemption clause.
Held: Whether a bailee’s acts constituted wilful misconduct is dependent upon the standard ordinarily expected from someone in that position. Here the judge was entitled to find wilful misconduct on the driver’s part. The broker had been liable to insure the goods and the liability was not limited by the convention.
Beldam LJ said: ‘Further a person could be said to act with reckless carelessness towards goods in his care if, aware of the risk that they may be lost or damaged, he nevertheless deliberately goes ahead and takes the risk, when it is unreasonable in all the circumstances for him to do so.’
Brooke LJ discussed the burden of proof in such a case, saying that the trial judge: ‘should also have directed himself that since a charge of wilful misconduct was a serious charge to make, the evidence ought to have satisfied the degree of probability appropriate to the seriousness of the charge before it was appropriate to find it proved.’

Judges:

Beldam LJ, Brooke LJ

Citations:

Times 12-May-1997, [1997] 2 LL Rep 369, [1997] EWCA Civ 1454

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Sheffield v Pickfords Limited and Pickfords Removals Limited CA 11-Feb-1997
The defendants had contracted to transport goods for the plaintiff. The goods had been left at empty premises and were damaged or stolen. The defendant sought to rely upon their clause excluding liability.
Held: The reasonableness of a . .
Cited – Graham v Belfast and Northern Counties Railway Co 1901
The court had to construe the phrase ‘wilful misconduct’.
Held: ‘Wilful misconduct in such a special condition means misconduct to which the will is party as contradistinguished from accident, and is far beyond any negligence, even gross or . .
Cited – Forder v Great Western Railway Company 1905
The court construed the phrase ‘wilful misconduct’.
Held: The court adopted the definition given in Graham, Lord Alverstone CJ adding: ‘The addition which I would suggest is, ‘or acts with reckless carelessness, not caring what the results of . .
Cited – Jones v Mrtin Bencher Ltd 1986
A deliberate disregard by a driver of EEC Regulations which govern the length of time that it was permissible for him to drive without a break amounted to ‘wilful misconduct’ when he fell asleep at the wheel and the goods he was carrying were . .
Cited – Circle Freight International Ltd v Medeast Gulf Imports Ltd CA 1988
The court considered the effect of a driver’s behaviour on the ability to claim under his insurance policy, on the basis that his behaviour would constitute ‘wilful misconduct’. Taylor LJ: ‘Mr Malins has sought to argue that although Huggins (the . .
Cited – Texas Instruments Ltd v Nason (Europe) Ltd 1991
A carrier, knowing of the high risk of theft from the area, left a trailer unattended in a car park in east London. His behaviour was held to be wilful misconduct allowing the insurance policy to be ineffective. . .
Cited – Keeton Sons and Co Ltd v Carl Prior Ltd CA 14-Mar-1985
The test of whether a clause has been incorporated into a contract is ‘Has reasonable notice of the terms been given?’. . .

Cited by:

Cited – TNT Global Spa and Another v Denfleet International Ltd and Another CA 2-May-2007
The driver of a lorry carrying the claimant’s goods was said to have fallen asleep at the wheel, and the cargo damaged in the accident. The carrier appealed a finding of liability for wilful misconduct.
Held: ‘I am unable to accept that mere . .
Cited – Scheps v Fine Art Logistic Ltd QBD 16-Mar-2007
The claimant bought fine art sculptures by Anish Kapoor at auction. They were stored by the defendant who when called upon to deliver them, said they had possibly been thrown away as rubbish. The defendant sought to limit its liability to the sum . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Negligence, Contract, Agency

Updated: 06 November 2022; Ref: scu.141850

Colin Facey Boats Limited v A Pank and Sons Limited and Another: CA 21 Mar 1997

The defendant had been engaged to carry out a re-wiring exercise. It was not a straightforward matter. He sub-contracted it to the second defendant who carried it out negligently, and a substantial fire resulted.
Held: The appeal failed. The defendant was under a duty to select a suitably skilled sub-contractor. He had failed to do so and was himself liable.
Otton LJ said: ‘In the course of argument Mr Richard Davies QC, for the appellants, expressed anxiety lest the outcome of this appeal might be understood to mean that a person, when recommending another as an independent or sub-contractor, guarantees or warrants the performance of the recommended contractor. To allay that anxiety, and for the avoidance of doubt, this decision should not be so construed. If this were so, it would have dire consequences in the construction industry, where, for example, main contractors frequently nominate (i.e. recommend) sub-contractors. In the absence of a contractual term to that effect, main contractors are not insurers of their nominated sub-contractors’ performance at the suit of the employer or other nominated sub-contractors.’

Judges:

Beldam, Otton LJJ, Sict Christopher Slade

Citations:

[1997] EWCA Civ 1299

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Contract, Negligence

Updated: 06 November 2022; Ref: scu.141695

Emptage v Financial Services Compensation Scheme Ltd: Admn 11 Oct 2012

The claimant had on her mortgage adviser’s advice charged her existing property to purchase property in Spain. After the investment failed, she lost the house. On the financial failure of the adviser without being insred, she claimed against the Compensation scheme, but now complained that the claim had been dealt with on the wrong basis, and not as a failure of mortgage advice.
Held: The principles applicable to the assessment of compensation were straightforward: FSCS had a broad discretion to pay compensation to claimants with valid claims to the extent that it considered that essential in order to provide fair compensation; it had a discretion to decide which elements of the claim should be accepted in order to achieve that; in this context fair compensation meant compensation which fairly compensated for the loss caused by the particular breach of duty; fair compensation for negligent or bad advice required that the claimant be restored as far as possible to the position she would have been in if the advice had not been given.
FSCS had failed to apply those principles properly because it had considered that Ms Emptage’s claim related to advice in connection with an unregulated activity, namely investment in property, and because it had approached her claim as having both protected and unprotected elements and had failed to view Mr Sharratt’s negligent advice as an indivisible package which included investment advice as an essential element, given that the mortgage was not feasible without it.

Judges:

Haddon-Cave J

Citations:

[2012] EWHC 2708 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Citing:

Cited – Regina v Investors Compensation Scheme Ltd, ex Parte Bowden and Another HL 18-Jul-1995
A regulated firm, Fisher Prew-Smith, ran a scheme whereby elderly homeowners were persuaded to invest money in equity-linked funds by mortgaging their homes on terms that the interest would roll up unless and until the total mortgage debt reached a . .

Cited by:

Appeal from – Emptage v Financial Services Compensation Scheme Ltd CA 18-Jun-2013
The claimants had acted on mortgage advice given by a company regulated by the FSA, as a result of which, on the collapse of the property market in Spain, they had lost their investment and their home which had been charged to assist in the purchase . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Financial Services, Negligence

Updated: 05 November 2022; Ref: scu.464962

Oxford Aviation Services Limited v Godolphin Management Company Limited: QBD 13 Feb 2004

An aircraft crashed. It was owned by the claimant and flown by the defendant. The claimant sought payment of various heads of damages relating to the loss of the aircraft. The parties disputed the terms of the bailment.
Held: The evidence suggested the aircraft was on hire, and insured by the defendant, who had to pay damages accordingly.

Judges:

The Honourable Mr Justice Cooke

Citations:

[2004] EWHC 232 (QB)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Agency, Negligence

Updated: 05 November 2022; Ref: scu.193483

W v Home Office: CA 19 Feb 1997

W had been held in immigration detention because of a crass administrative mistake about his ability to establish his country of origin.
Held: An immigration officer who was using his statutory powers is not liable for negligent or false imprisonment: ‘The process whereby the decision making body gathers information and comes to its decision cannot be the subject of an action in negligence. It suffices to rely on the absence of the required proximity. In gathering information, and taking it into account the Defendants are acting pursuant to their statutory powers and within that area of their discretion where only deliberate abuse would provide a private remedy. For them to owe a duty of care to immigrants would be inconsistent with the proper performance of their responsibilities as immigration officers. In conducting their inquiries, and making decisions in relation to immigrants, including whether they should be detained pending those inquiries, they are acting in that capacity of public servant to which the considerations outlined above apply.’

Judges:

Lord Woolf MR, Thorpe, Waller LJJ

Citations:

Times 14-Mar-1997, [1997] EWCA Civ 1052, [1997] Imm AR 302

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Home Office v Mohammed and Others CA 29-Mar-2011
The claimants sought damages saying that after a decision had been made that they should receive indefinite leave to remain in 2001 (latest), the leave was not issued until 2007 (earliest) thus causing them severe losses. The defendant now appealed . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Torts – Other, Negligence

Updated: 05 November 2022; Ref: scu.90211

Milton Keynes Borough Council v Nulty and Others: TCC 3 Nov 2011

There had been two fires at depots owned by the claimants. They brought proceedings against an employee, but his insurers repudiated liability saying that they had not been promptly notfied of the claim.
Held: The first fire was caused either by a cigarette end discarded by Mr Nulty or it was caused by arcing from a disused electric cable which had been left live and in a dangerous condition. The second fire resulted from a failure properly to extinguish the first fire and the Court found against the deceased’s insurers on the issue of coverage under the policy.The first fire was caused either by a cigarette end discarded by Mr Nulty or it was caused by arcing from a disused electric cable which had been left live and in a dangerous condition.

Judges:

Edwards-Stuart J

Citations:

[2011] EWHC 2847 (TCC)

Links:

Bailii

Citing:

Cited – Rhesa Shipping Co SA v Edmonds (The Popi M) HL 16-May-1985
The Popi M sank in calm seas and fair weather as a result of a large and sudden entry of water into her engine room through her shell plating. The vessel’s owners claimed against her hull and machinery underwriters, contending that the loss was . .

Cited by:

Appeal from – Nulty and Others v Milton Keynes Borough Council CA 24-Jan-2013
There had been two fires at a depot owned by the claimants. The fires were found to have been likely to have been caused by the deceased employee. His insurers had repudiated liability saying that the had not been notified oin a timely fashion.
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Negligence, Insurance

Updated: 04 November 2022; Ref: scu.463865

Robbins v London Borough of Bexley: TCC 16 Aug 2012

The claimant sought damages saying that her house had been damaged by subsidence after dessication of the soil by trees under the defendant’s control.
Held: The defendants were liable.

Judges:

Edwards-Stuart J

Citations:

[2012] EWHC 2257 (TCC)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Law Reform (Contributory Negligence) Act 1945 1(1)

Citing:

Cited – Berent v Family Mosaic Housing and Another CA 13-Jul-2012
The claimant sought damages saying that her house had been damaged by the roots of plane trees on neighbouring land for which the defendants were responsible. . .

Cited by:

Appeal from – Robbins v London Borough of Bexley CA 17-Oct-2013
The claimant said that his house had been damaged by tree roots for which the appellant was responsible. The trees were 33 metres from the house.
Held: The appeal failed. The immediate cause of the damage was a failure to do something which . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Negligence, Nuisance

Updated: 04 November 2022; Ref: scu.463659

Blair-Ford v CRS Adventures Ltd: QBD 13 Aug 2012

The claimant was very severely injured when throwing a wellington boot through his legs at an outdoor pursuits centre operated by the defendant. He had fallen onto his head. He asserted negligence, they said that an appropriate risk assessment had been undertaken, and that the injury could not reasonably have been foreseen.
Held: The claim failed.

Judges:

Globe J

Citations:

[2012] EWHC 2360 (QB)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Adventure Activity Centres (Young Persons’ Safety) Act 1995, Adventure Activities Licensing Regulations 2004

Negligence, Personal Injury

Updated: 04 November 2022; Ref: scu.463641

Roberts v The Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen and Families Association and Another: CA 17 Jul 2020

Whether the 1978 Act has extraterritorial effect.

Judges:

Lord Justice David Richards
Lord Justice Irwin
And
Lord Justice Phillips

Citations:

[2020] EWCA Civ 926, [2021] 2 WLR 87, [2021] 2 All ER (Comm) 497, [2020] PIQR P20, [2021] 2 All ER 449, [2020] WLR(D) 422, [2021] QB 859

Links:

Bailii, WLRD

Statutes:

Civil Liability (Contribution) Act 1978

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

At CA – The Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen and Families Association – Forces Help and Another v Allgemeines Krankenhaus Viersen Gmbh SC 2-Nov-2022
Question as to the effect of the Civil Liability (Contribution) Act 1978, namely whether it has mandatory or overriding effect (‘overriding effect’) so that it applies to all contribution claims brought in England and Wales, or whether it applies . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Negligence, International

Updated: 04 November 2022; Ref: scu.652576

Williams; Reid v Natural Life Health Foods Limited and Mistlin: CA 5 Dec 1996

(Majority) A director of a one man company himself could himself be liable for negligent advice outside his duties as a director where his personal character known to be relied upon. In order to fix a director with personal liability, it must be shown that he assumed personal responsibility for the negligent misstatement made on behalf of the company. Because of the importance of the status of limited liability, a company director is only to be held personally liable for the company’s negligent misstatements if there is established some special circumstance; and in the case of a director of a one-man company particular vigilance is needed, lest the protection of incorporation should be virtually nullified. But once such special circumstances are established, the fact of incorporation does not preclude the establishment of personal liability. The decision is one of fact and degree. Where representations are made negligently by a company so as to attract tortious liability under the principle of Hedley Byrne, the primary liability is that of the corporate representor. In the vast majority of cases it is also the sole liability. The law does, however, recognise a rare and restricted category of case in which a director will be personally liable for the negligent misstatement. The question to be asked is ‘do the circumstances, when viewed as a whole, involve an assumption by the director of personal responsibility for the impugned statement?’

Judges:

Hirst and Waite L.JJ, Sir Patrick Russell

Citations:

Times 09-Jan-1997, [1996] EWCA Civ 1110, [1997] 1 BCLC 131

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – Williams and Another v Natural Life Health Foods Ltd and Another QBD 18-Jan-1996
A company director can be liable for the negligent mis-statement of the company if he warrants his own personal skill. . .

Cited by:

Appeal from – Williams and Another v Natural Life Health Foods Ltd and Another HL 30-Apr-1998
A company director was not personally reliable in negligence for bad advice given by him as director unless it could clearly be shown that he had willingly accepted such personal responsibility. A special relationship involving an assumption of . .
Cited – Niru Battery Manufacturing Company, Bank Sepah Iran v Milestone Trading Limited CA 23-Oct-2003
The claimant had contracted to purchase lead from some of the defendants. There were delays in payment but when funds were made available they should have been repaid. An incorrect bill of lading was presented. The bill certified that the goods had . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Company, Negligence

Updated: 03 November 2022; Ref: scu.140977

A B and others v Tameside and Glossop Health Authority and Trafford Health Authority: CA 13 Nov 1996

The choice of the telephone as a means of alerting and re-assuring people, who had received treatment from a health worker later found to be HIV+, was proper. The was no breach of a duty care, even though some people called had suffered distress: ‘once the defendants had decided to inform their patients at all, they were under a duty to take such steps to inform them as were reasonable, having regard both to the foreseeable risk that some of them might suffer psychiatric injury (or any existing psychiatric injury might be materially aggravated) upon receipt of the information ‘ and ‘the judge has to perform the familiar role of considering the factual evidence carefully, listening to the expert evidence, and forming a view as to whether in all the circumstances these public health authorities fell below the standards reasonably to be expected of them when they selected their preferred method of communicating the information to the patients.’

Judges:

Brooke LJ

Citations:

Gazette 04-Dec-1996, Times 27-Nov-1996, [1996] EWCA Civ 938, [1996] 35 BMRLR 39

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – AB and others v Leeds Teaching Hospital NHS Trust, Cardiff and Vale NHS Trust QBD 26-Mar-2004
Representative claims were made against the respondents, hospitals, pathologists etc with regard to the removal of organs from deceased children without the informed consent of the parents. They claimed under the tort of wrongful interference.
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Negligence, Professional Negligence, Personal Injury

Updated: 03 November 2022; Ref: scu.140805

Harrison v Jagged Globe Ltd: CA 29 May 2012

The defendant tour operator appealed against a finding that it was liable after the claimant had been injured while climbing in Ecuador on a tour it had arranged, saying that it had been ‘self-led’ by the client Sir Ranulph Fiennes. The claimant had fallen when engaging in a stunt arranged for filming.

Judges:

Laws, itchford, Lloyd-Jones LJJ

Citations:

[2012] EWCA Civ 835

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Package Travel, Package Holidays and Package Tours Regulations 1992

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Negligence, Personal Injury, Consumer

Updated: 01 November 2022; Ref: scu.460540

H v Norfolk County Council: CA 10 May 1996

This was an application for leave to appeal against a striking out order. The plaintiff, aged 22, alleged that he had been physically and sexually abused by his foster father. He claimed that the council was negligent in not properly monitoring and supervising his placement and for failing to investigate a series of reports when he was aged 11. He contended the County Council should have removed him from foster care.
Held: Lord Justice Simon Brown said: ‘For my part, I see no force in any of the submissions. All were advanced below and all in my judgment were properly dealt with in the judge’s conclusions which I have already recited. I bear in mind as I am specifically invited to do, what Lord Browne-Wilkinson said (749G) namely that; ‘the public policy consideration, which has first claim on the loyalty of the law is that wrongs should be remedied and that very potent counter considerations are required to over-ride that policy.’

Judges:

Lord Justice Simon Brown

Citations:

Unreported, 10th May 1996 LTA 95/7562/E

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – JD, MAK and RK, RK and Another v East Berkshire Community Health, Dewsbury Health Care NHS Trust and Kirklees Metropolitan Council, Oldham NHS Trust and Dr Blumenthal CA 31-Jul-2003
Damages were sought by parents for psychological harm against health authorities for the wrongful diagnosis of differing forms of child abuse. They appealed dismissal of their awards on the grounds that it was not ‘fair just and reasonable’ to . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Negligence, Local Government

Updated: 31 October 2022; Ref: scu.185985

Welton, Welton v North Cornwall District Council: CA 17 Jul 1996

The defendant authority appealed a finding that it was liable in negligence from the conduct of one of its environmental health officers. The plaintiff had set out to refurbish and open a restaurant. He said the officer gave him a list of things he must do. He had done them, but the licence was still refused. A Local Authority was liable after its environmental health officer negligently required food premises to do unnecessary work. The plaintiffs established an assumption of responsibility on the part of a servant of the defendant authority in respect of statements made to the plaintiffs as to the alterations necessary to secure compliance with food regulations. The guidance was given with an inplied threat of sanctions if they were not followed, and the authority could not resile from hem.

Judges:

Rose LJ, Ward LJ, Judge LJ

Citations:

Gazette 18-Sep-1996, Times 18-Jul-1996, [1996] EWCA Civ 516, [1997] 1 WLR 570, [1997] PNLR 108

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Food Safety Act 1990 44, Food Act 1984 116

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Tidman v Reading Borough Council QBD 4-Nov-1994
The plaintiff wanted to sell his land. The purchaser wished to know the planning status and prospects for the land. The local authority published a leaflet encouraging those interested to seek guidance from the authority’s planning officers. The . .
Cited – Hill v Chief Constable of West Yorkshire HL 28-Apr-1987
No General ty of Care Owed by Police
The mother of a victim of the Yorkshire Ripper claimed in negligence against the police alleging that they had failed to satisfy their duty to exercise all reasonable care and skill to apprehend the perpetrator of the murders and to protect members . .
Cited – Welsh v Chief Constable of Merseyside Police 1993
On conviction for one offence, the plaintiff asked for two other offences to be taken into consideration. He was bailed pending sentence. He was then arrested for the other offences and wrongfully held in custody. The Crown Prosecution Service had . .
Cited – Osman and another v Ferguson and another CA 7-Oct-1992
Limits of Police duty to protect
A schoolmaster developed an infatuation for a teenage pupil. It led to the killing of the pupil’s father, the wounding of the pupil, the wounding of a deputy headmaster and the killing of the deputy headmaster’s son. Mr Osman’s widow and the pupil . .
Cited – Alexandrou v Oxford (Chief Constable of the Merseyside Police) CA 16-Feb-1990
A shop was burgled. The shop-owner blamed the police for their negligent investigation.
Held: The police were not liable in negligence. . .
Cited – Elguzouli-Daf v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis and Another CA 16-Nov-1994
The Court upheld decisions striking out actions for negligence brought by claimants who had been arrested and held in custody during criminal investigations which were later discontinued. The Crown Prosecution Service owes no general duty of care to . .
Cited – Ancell and Another v McDermott and Others CA 17-Mar-1993
Police are under no duty to warn road users of a hazard on road. The police have no general liability in negligence for reasons of public policy. . .
Cited – Ancell v McDermott CA 29-Jan-1993
The plaintiff sought damages in negligence. Diesel had been spilled on the road. Though police officers saw it and took basic steps, the deceased was in a car which skidded on the diesel some time later. . .
Cited – Peabody Donation Fund v Sir Lindsay Parkinson and Co Ltd HL 18-Oct-1983
Architects proposed a system of flexible drains for a site, but the contractors persuaded them to accept rigid drains which once laid proved inadequate at considerable cost. The local authority had permitted the departure from the plans.
Held: . .
Cited – Ryeford Homes v Seven Oaks District Council 1989
The planning function is exercised by a local authority on behalf of the public at large and not for private individuals. . .
Cited – Caparo Industries Plc v Dickman and others HL 8-Feb-1990
Limitation of Loss from Negligent Mis-statement
The plaintiffs sought damages from accountants for negligence. They had acquired shares in a target company and, relying upon the published and audited accounts which overstated the company’s earnings, they purchased further shares.
Held: The . .
Cited – Ancell v McDermott CA 29-Jan-1993
The plaintiff sought damages in negligence. Diesel had been spilled on the road. Though police officers saw it and took basic steps, the deceased was in a car which skidded on the diesel some time later. . .
Cited – Swinney and Another v Chief Constable of Northumbria CA 22-Mar-1996
The plaintiff, a woman and her husband, had passed on information in confidence to the police about the identity of a person implicated in the killing of a police officer, expressing her concern that she did not want the source of the information to . .
Cited – Marc Rich and Co Ag and Others v Bishop Rock Marine Co Ltd and Others HL 6-Jul-1995
A surveyor acting on behalf of the classification society had recommended that after repairs specified by him had been carried out a vessel, the Nicholas H, should be allowed to proceed. It was lost at sea.
Held: The marine classification . .
Cited – Smith v Eric S Bush, a firm etc HL 20-Apr-1989
In Smith, the lender instructed a valuer who knew that the buyer and mortgagee were likely to rely on his valuation alone. The valuer said his terms excluded responsibility. The mortgagor had paid an inspection fee to the building society and . .
Cited – X (Minors) v Bedfordshire County Council; M (A Minor) and Another v Newham London Borough Council; Etc HL 29-Jun-1995
Liability in Damages on Statute Breach to be Clear
Damages were to be awarded against a Local Authority for breach of statutory duty in a care case only if the statute was clear that damages were capable of being awarded. in the ordinary case a breach of statutory duty does not, by itself, give rise . .
Cited – Henderson v Merrett Syndicates Ltd HL 25-Jul-1994
Lloyds Agents Owe Care Duty to Member; no Contract
Managing agents conducted the financial affairs of the Lloyds Names belonging to the syndicates under their charge. It was alleged that they managed these affairs with a lack of due careleading to enormous losses.
Held: The assumption of . .
Cited – Spring v Guardian Assurance Plc and Others HL 7-Jul-1994
The plaintiff, who worked in financial services, complained of the terms of the reference given by his former employer. Having spoken of his behaviour towards members of the team, it went on: ‘his former superior has further stated he is a man of . .
Cited – Rowling v Takaro Properties Ltd PC 30-Nov-1987
(New Zealand) The minister had been called upon to consent to the issue of shares to a foreign investor. The plaintiff said that the minister’s negligent refusal of consent had led to the collapse of the project and financial losses.
Held: On . .
Cited – T v Surrey County Council and Others QBD 21-Jan-1994
The mother of T, an injured baby who was under a year old, sued the council for failing to cancel the registration of a child minder who had previously cared for S, a four-month old child who suffered serious injury probably through shaking, and for . .

Cited by:

Cited – Regina v Lam and Others (T/a ‘Namesakes of Torbay’) and Borough of Torbay CA 30-Jul-1997
The claimant sought damages after the planning authority allowed the first defendant to conduct a manufacturing business in the course of which spraying activities took place which caused them personal injuries and loss of business.
Held: The . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Negligence, Local Government

Updated: 31 October 2022; Ref: scu.140383

Dolby v Milner: CA 1996

Russell LJ said: ‘It is to be observed that at no stage in the judgment does the judge refer to and emphasise, as in my judgment he should have done, the fact that the plaintiff here was emerging from a minor road onto a major road, and was consequently under a continuing obligation to give way to traffic on the major road.’

Judges:

Russell LJ

Citations:

[1996] 2 CLY 4430

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Heaton v Herzog CA 13-Nov-2008
The court considered an accident caused when a motorcyclist, travelling at excessive speed along a main road, collided with a car that emerged from a side road. The driver of the car had not looked right as she moved out of the side road.
Cited – Armsden v Kent Police CA 26-Jun-2009
The claimants sought damages as personal representatives after the deceased died when her car was hit by a police car responding to an emergency call. The defendant appealed a finding of negligence.
Held: The appeal succeeded. The judge had . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Negligence

Updated: 27 October 2022; Ref: scu.377549

Wood v Law Society: CA 1 Mar 1995

The solicitor had acted for the client in a series of loans, and had not disclosed his own directorship in one or more of the companies. His firm later acted for the lender in recovering possession form their former client. The claimant made several complaints to the Law Society.
Held: A damages claim against Law Society for failure to deal properly with a complaint failed. The plaintiff’s damages did not arise from the Society’s fault, but that of the solicitor.

Citations:

Times 02-Mar-1995, Independent 01-Mar-1995

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – Wood v Law Society QBD 28-Jul-1993
The claimant said that her several complaints to the Law Society about her former solicitor had been negligently handled.
Held: There is no general duty of care owed to clients, or opponents, of solicitors on the part of the Law Society, as to . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Negligence, Administrative, Legal Professions

Updated: 27 October 2022; Ref: scu.90586

Ancell v McDermott: CA 29 Jan 1993

The plaintiff sought damages in negligence. Diesel had been spilled on the road. Though police officers saw it and took basic steps, the deceased was in a car which skidded on the diesel some time later.

Judges:

Beldam LJ

Citations:

[1993] EWCA Civ 20, [1993] 4 All ER 355

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Welton, Welton v North Cornwall District Council CA 17-Jul-1996
The defendant authority appealed a finding that it was liable in negligence from the conduct of one of its environmental health officers. The plaintiff had set out to refurbish and open a restaurant. He said the officer gave him a list of things he . .
Cited – Welton, Welton v North Cornwall District Council CA 17-Jul-1996
The defendant authority appealed a finding that it was liable in negligence from the conduct of one of its environmental health officers. The plaintiff had set out to refurbish and open a restaurant. He said the officer gave him a list of things he . .
Cited – Hertfordshire Police v Van Colle; Smith v Chief Constable of Sussex Police HL 30-Jul-2008
Police Obligations to Witnesses is Limited
A prosecution witness was murdered by the accused shortly before his trial. The parents of the deceased alleged that the failure of the police to protect their son was a breach of article 2.
Held: The House was asked ‘If the police are alerted . .
Cited – Hertfordshire Police v Van Colle; Smith v Chief Constable of Sussex Police HL 30-Jul-2008
Police Obligations to Witnesses is Limited
A prosecution witness was murdered by the accused shortly before his trial. The parents of the deceased alleged that the failure of the police to protect their son was a breach of article 2.
Held: The House was asked ‘If the police are alerted . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Negligence, Police

Updated: 27 October 2022; Ref: scu.262593

Topp v London Country Bus (South West) Ltd: CA 22 Feb 1993

A Bus Company had no duty of care to a victim of an accident caused by a thief who had stolen their bus. Company is not liable in negligence for having left bus with key in it to victim of thief’s driving.

Citations:

Gazette 12-May-1993, Ind Summary 22-Feb-1993

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Negligence, Personal Injury, Transport

Updated: 26 October 2022; Ref: scu.89916

McFarlane v E E Caledonia Ltd: CA 10 Sep 1993

The court will not extend a duty of care to mere bystanders of horrific events. Nor is any duty of care owed to a rescuer lacking ordinary courage. Whether a person is to be regarded as a rescuer will be a question of fact to be decided on the particular facts of the case. Trivial or peripheral assistance will not be sufficient.

Judges:

Stuart-Smith LJ

Citations:

Independent 10-Sep-1993, Times 30-Sep-1993, [1994] 2 All ER 1

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See Also – McFarlane v E E Caledonia Ltd QBD 8-Dec-1994
The court can order a champertous non-party to pay a successful defendant’s costs of defending the claim.
A non-party unlawfully supporting an action was ordered to pay the costs of the defendant.
Held: It may not be necessary to every . .

Cited by:

Cited – White, Frost and others v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire and others HL 3-Dec-1998
No damages for Psychiatric Harm Alone
The House considered claims by police officers who had suffered psychiatric injury after tending the victims of the Hillsborough tragedy.
Held: The general rules restricting the recovery of damages for pure psychiatric harm applied to the . .
Cited – Donachie v The Chief Constable of the Greater Manchester Police CA 7-Apr-2004
The claimant had been asked to work under cover. The surveillance equipment he was asked to use was faulty, requiring him to put himself at risk repeatedly to maintain it resulting in a stress disorder and a stroke.
Held: There was a direct . .
See Also – McFarlane v E E Caledonia Ltd QBD 8-Dec-1994
The court can order a champertous non-party to pay a successful defendant’s costs of defending the claim.
A non-party unlawfully supporting an action was ordered to pay the costs of the defendant.
Held: It may not be necessary to every . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Negligence

Updated: 26 October 2022; Ref: scu.83529

M and Another v Newham London Borough Council and Others; X (Minors) v Bedfordshire County Council: CA 24 Feb 1994

A local authority was not liable in damages for breach of a statutory duty in Social Services. The policy which has first claim on the loyalty of the law is that wrongs should be remedied. The court would not go so far as to hold that the education authorities owed the plaintiffs a duty of care, it was equally not willing to say that the claims were ‘unarguable or almost incontestably bad’ and ‘If a plaintiff can show (1) that the adverse consequences of his congenital defect could have been mitigated by early diagnosis of the defect and appropriate treatment or educational provision; (2) that the adverse consequences of his congenital defect were not mitigated because early diagnosis was not made, or appropriate treatment not given or provision not made, with resulting detriment to his level of educational attainment and employability; and (3) that this damage is not too remote, I do not regard the claim for damage to be necessarily bad.’
Sir Thomas Bingham MR (dissenting): ‘It would require very potent considerations of public policy which do not in my view exist here, to override the rule of public policy which has first claim on the loyalty of the law: that wrongs should be remedied.’

Judges:

Sir Thomas Bingham MR, Evans LJ

Citations:

Independent 24-Feb-1994, Times 03-Mar-1994, [1995] 2 AC 633

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – X (Minors) v Bedfordshire County Council QBD 24-Nov-1993
A local authority has no duty of care in negligence as to the education of children beyond its statutory obligations to children in its care. . .

Cited by:

Appeal from – X (Minors) v Bedfordshire County Council; M (A Minor) and Another v Newham London Borough Council; Etc HL 29-Jun-1995
Liability in Damages on Statute Breach to be Clear
Damages were to be awarded against a Local Authority for breach of statutory duty in a care case only if the statute was clear that damages were capable of being awarded. in the ordinary case a breach of statutory duty does not, by itself, give rise . .
Cited – Adams v Bracknell Forest Borough Council HL 17-Jun-2004
A attended the defendant’s schools between 1977 and 1988. He had always experienced difficulties with reading and writing and as an adult found those difficulties to be an impediment in his employment. He believed them to be the cause of the . .
Cited – Holland v Lampen-Wolfe HL 20-Jul-2000
The US established a base at Menwith Hill in Yorkshire, and provided educational services through its staff to staff families. The claimant a teacher employed at the base alleged that a report on her was defamatory. The defendant relied on state . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Local Government, Negligence

Updated: 26 October 2022; Ref: scu.83253

Martine v South East Kent Health Authority: CA 22 Mar 1993

The authority applied ex parte under the 1984 to the magistrate for the revocation of the plaitiff’s nursing home licence. It was supported by a written statement of the reasons for making the order made by the health authority’s chief nursing officer. The order cancelling the registration was made by the magistrate and the nursing home was perforce closed with financial loss to its proprietor. The licence was later re-instated. The proprietor sought damages.
Held: There was no cause of action in negligence for the alleged careless investigation by an area health authority towards a registered nursing home leading to an urgent application under section 30 for cancellation of the registration. The authority had no duty of care was not owed.
Dillon LJ said: ‘it was not just or reasonable . . that there should be a duty of care because the adversarial system of litigation has its own rules and requirements, which operate as checks and balances’ and that if in any circumstances the checks and balances should fail ‘negligence as a tort could not be, and should not be, invoked as the remedy.’
Leggatt LJ said: ‘The prescribed procedure is fast, and interposes only a sole justice of the peace between a health authority in pursuit of an order under the Act and the owner of a nursing home. But the fact that the safeguard is slight does not entitle a litigant to make good a supposed deficiency in the statutory procedure by recourse to the tort of negligence.’

Judges:

Dillon LJ, Leggatt LJ

Citations:

Ind Summary 22-Mar-1993, (1993) 20 BMLR 51, Times 08-Mar-1993

Statutes:

Registered Homes Act 1984 30

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Jain and Another v Trent Strategic Health Authority CA 22-Nov-2007
The claimant argued that the defendant owed him a duty of care as proprietor of a registered nursing home in cancelling the registration of the home under the 1984 Act. The authority appealed a finding that it owed such a duty.
Held: The . .
Cited – Bowden and Another v Lancashire County Council CA 16-Apr-2002
The claimant had succeeded in her appeal against the cancellation of her registration as a child minder, and now sought damages for negligence in using unnecessarily the emergency procedure leading to damage to the claimant’s reputation and . .
Cited – Trent Strategic Health Authority v Jain and Another HL 21-Jan-2009
The claimants’ nursing home business had been effectively destroyed by the actions of the Authority which had applied to revoke their licence without them being given notice and opportunity to reply. They succeeded on appeal, but the business was by . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Negligence, Licensing, Health Professions

Updated: 26 October 2022; Ref: scu.83452

Dobbie v Medway Health Authority: CA 11 May 1994

The plaintiff had a lump on her breast. The surgeon, without first subjecting the lump to a microscopic examination in order to determine whether it was cancerous or benign, removed the breast. This was in 1973. The lump was subsequently found to be benign. The patient knew very soon after the operation that the lump was benign but did not know until 1988 that that meant her breast need not have been removed. She began proceedings for negligence in 1989.
Held: Time began to run from the date of knowledge of the cause of an injury, not the date when the claimant knew that the cause was tortious. Sir Thomas Bingham MR considered the test of knowledge: ‘This test is not in my judgment hard to apply. It involves ascertaining the personal injury on which the claim is founded and asking when the claimant knew of it. In the case of an insidious disease or a delayed result of a surgical mishap, this knowledge may come well after the suffering of the disease or the performance of the surgery. But more usually the claimant knows that he has suffered personal injury as soon or almost as soon as he does so’. ‘The word ‘attributable’ in section 14(1) (b) does not mean ’caused by’. It merely means ‘capable of being attributed”.
Sir Thomas Bingham MR said: ‘The personal injury on which the plaintiff seeks to found her claim is the removal of her breast and the psychological and physical harm which followed. She knew of this injury within hours, days or months of the operation and she at all times reasonably considered it to be significant. She knew from the beginning that this injury was capable of being attributed to, or more bluntly was the clear and direct result of, an act or omission of the health authority. What she did not appreciate until later was that the health authority’s act or omission was (arguably) negligent or blameworthy. But her want of that knowledge did not stop time beginning to run.’
As to the meaning of ‘significant injury’: ‘The requirement that the injury of which a plaintiff has knowledge should be ‘significant’ is in my view directed solely to the quantum of the injury and not to the plaintiff’s evaluation of its cause, nature or usualness. Time does not run against a plaintiff, even if he is aware of the injury, if he would reasonably have considered it insufficiently serious to justify proceedings against an acquiescent and credit-worthy defendant, if (in other words) he would reasonably have accepted it as a fact of life or not worth bothering about. It is otherwise if the injury is reasonably to be considered as sufficiently serious within the statutory definition: time then runs (subject to the requirement of attributability) even if the plaintiff believes the injury to be normal or properly caused.’

Judges:

Sir Thomas Bingham MR, Steyn LJ

Citations:

Ind Summary 06-Jun-1994, Times 18-May-1994, [1994] 1 WLR 1234, 1994 5 MEDLR 160, [1994] EWCA Civ 13, [1994] 4 All ER 450, [1994] PIQR 353

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Limitation Act 1980 11(4)(b) 14(1)(b)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Halford v Brookes CA 1991
The plaintiff, the mother and administratrix of the estate of a 16 year old girl, alleged that her daughter had been murdered by one or both of the Defendants. The claim was for damages for battery. Rougier J at first instance had decided that: . .

Cited by:

Cited – Rowbottom v Royal Masonic Hospital CA 12-Feb-2002
The claimant sought damages for the negligent failure to administer antibiotics. Earlier proceedings had been discontinued, and the hospital resisted subsequent proceedings, claiming them to be time-barred. The claimant asserted that he knew of the . .
Cited – O’Driscoll v Dudley Health Authority CA 30-Apr-1998
The plaintiff sought damages for the negligence of the respondent in her care at birth. Years later the family concluded that her condition was a result of negligence. They waited until she was 21, when they mistakenly believed that she became an . .
Cited – Roberts vWinbow (3) CA 4-Dec-1998
The plaintiff was treated for depression by the defendant by prescription of drugs. She sufferred a reaction, but now claimed that the doctor’s slow reaction caused her to suffer lasting injury. The question on appeal was, if a plaintiff suffers . .
Cited – Haward and others v Fawcetts HL 1-Mar-2006
The claimant sought damages from his accountants, claiming negligence. The accountants pleaded limitation. They had advised him in connection with an investment in a company which investment went wrong.
Held: It was argued that the limitation . .
Cited – KR and others v Bryn Alyn Community (Holdings) Ltd and Another CA 10-Jun-2003
The court considered an extension of the time for claiming damages for personal injuries after the claimants said they had been sexually abused as children in the care of the defendants.
Held: The test to be applied under section 14(2) was . .
Cited – McCoubrey v Ministry of Defence CA 24-Jan-2007
The defendant appealed a decision allowing a claim to proceed more than ten years after it had been suffered. The claimant’s hearing had been damaged after an officer threw a thunderflash into his trench on an exercise.
Held: The defendant’s . .
Cited – Pierce v Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council QBD 13-Dec-2007
The claimant sought damages, saying that the local authority had failed to protect him when he was a child against abuse by his parents.
Held: The claimant had been known to the authority since he was a young child, and they owed him a duty of . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Limitation, Negligence

Updated: 26 October 2022; Ref: scu.80075

Barclays Bank Plc v Fairclough Building Ltd: CA 11 May 1994

Contributory negligence is no defence to a claim which was made out strictly in contract only.

Citations:

Gazette 29-Jun-1994, Times 11-May-1994, [1994] EWCA Civ 3, [1995] QB 214, [1995] 1 All ER 289, [1994] 3 WLR 1057

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Law Reform (Contributory Negligence) Act 1945 1(1), 4

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See also – Barclays Bank Plc v Fairclough Building Ltd (No 2) CA 15-Feb-1995
Contractors taking on building work should be assumed to have taken account of the possible presence of asbestos when quoting for the work. . .

Cited by:

See also – Barclays Bank Plc v Fairclough Building Ltd (No 2) CA 15-Feb-1995
Contractors taking on building work should be assumed to have taken account of the possible presence of asbestos when quoting for the work. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Contract, Negligence

Updated: 26 October 2022; Ref: scu.78202

Morran v Waddell: SCS 24 Oct 1883

Inner House First Division. – Reparation – Culpa – Railway – Private Line of Railway – Obligation to Fence – Contributory Negligence.

Citations:

(1883) 11 R 44, [1883] SLR 21 – 28, [1883] SLR 21

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

Scotland

Cited by:

Cited – British Railways Board v Herrington HL 16-Feb-1972
Land-owner’s Possible Duty to Trespassers
The plaintiff, a child had gone through a fence onto the railway line, and been badly injured. The Board knew of the broken fence, but argued that they owed no duty to a trespasser.
Held: Whilst a land-owner owes no general duty of care to a . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Transport, Negligence

Updated: 24 October 2022; Ref: scu.182842

Coope and Others v Ward and Another: CA 28 Jan 2015

The court was asked: ‘ (i) whether the Appellants, owed to the Respondents a ‘measured duty of care’ which, in certain circumstances, may arise as between adjoining landowners in respect of a hazard arising on their land without their fault; (ii) what that duty amounted to; and (iii) whether the appellants were in breach of it.’ A retaining wall had collapsed over the neighbour below’s land. Its height had been increased beyond , by a predecessor in title of the upper land.

Judges:

Arden, Christopher Clarke, Bean LJJ

Citations:

[2015] EWCA Civ 30, [2015] WLR(D) 34, [2015] 1 WLR 4081

Links:

Bailii, WLRD

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Ilford Urban District Council v Beal and Judd 1925
A defendant land owner is not liable in nuisance to a property below them when they had neither created any nuisance nor continued it when they knew or ought to have known that their property constituted a nuisance or hidden danger to the properties . .
Cited – St Anne’s Well Brewery Co v Roberts 1928
. .
Cited – St Anne’s Well Brewery Co v Roberts CA 2-Jan-1928
Scrutton LJ said: ‘Under those circumstances it appears to me that the cardinal thing which would have to be proved to establish any liability against anybody would be, namely, knowledge of the defect which ultimately resulted in the fall of the . .
Cited – Wilkins v Leighton 1932
Luxmoore J said that ‘one of the most normal uses of land’ (for the purposes of the Rylands v. Fletcher doctrine) ‘ . . is to put buildings on it.’ . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Negligence, Land

Updated: 24 October 2022; Ref: scu.541955

Mcallister v Campbell: QBNI 18 Feb 2014

The court was asked to apportion responsibility for personal injuries suffered in a road traffic collision between the claimant cyclist and defendant car driver. The issue concerned the credibility of the witnesses. The defendant said that the cyclist simply drove into the back of his car just after it stopped. The claimant said that it had simply stopped without regard for his presence.
Held: The defendant’s evidence was inconsistent with the finding that the car moved forward during the crash and otherwise. The cyclist should have maintained a better lookout, and was liable to 25%. Damages accordingly.

Judges:

Stephens J

Citations:

[2014] NIQB 24

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

Northern Ireland

Negligence, Personal Injury

Updated: 24 October 2022; Ref: scu.526627

Rehill v Rider Holdings Ltd: CA 16 May 2012

The claimant had been injured, being hit by the defendant’s bus.

Judges:

Ward, Richards, Patten LJJ

Citations:

[2012] EWCA Civ 628

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Law Reform (Contributory Negligence) Act 1945 1(1)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Adopted – Eagle v Chambers CA 24-Jul-2003
The claimant was severely injured when run down by the defendant driving his car. She was in Blackpool, and drunk and wandering in the highway. The defendant was himself at or near the drink driving limit. She appealed against a finding that she was . .

Cited by:

Cited – Ayres v Odedra QBD 18-Jan-2013
The claimant sought damages for serious personal injury, saying that the defendant had deliberately or recklessly driven at him as a pedestrian, knocking him over. The defendant had been tried and acquitted of motoring offences. He said that the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury, Negligence, Road Traffic

Updated: 22 October 2022; Ref: scu.457754

MM v Newlands School and Another: CA 24 Jan 2007

The clamant sought damages after being injured in a clash in a rugby match. The match was for under 15s, but the other boy was 15.

Judges:

Lord Justice Waller Lord Justice Rix Lord Justice Hooper Vice-President of the Court of Appeal, Civil Division

Citations:

[2007] EWCA Civ 21

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Negligence, Personal Injury

Updated: 22 October 2022; Ref: scu.248319

Waters v Commissioner of Police for Metropolis: CA 3 Jul 1997

Citations:

[1997] EWCA Civ 2012

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – Waters v Commissioner of Police of Metropolis EAT 17-Nov-1994
. .

Cited by:

Appeal from – Waters v Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis HL 27-Jul-2000
A policewoman, having made a complaint of serious sexual assault against a fellow officer complained again that the Commissioner had failed to protect her against retaliatory assaults. Her claim was struck out, but restored on appeal.
Held: . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Police, Discrimination, Negligence

Updated: 19 October 2022; Ref: scu.142409

Taylor v Dumbarton Burgh and County Tramways Co Ltd: HL 26 Apr 1918

A repairing car of a tramway company stopped in a village to deal with a defective standard. Children collected about it. Having effected the repair one of the employees on the car looked along the north side on which the children apparently were, and seeing all clear gave the signal to move. He did not look along the south side of the car, and a small child who happened to be there was run over and injured.
Held (rev. judgment of the Second Division) that the company was liable in reparation because of negligence on the part of its servant.
Held that supposing it were negligence to allow a small child to play on the road unattended, such negligence was not contributory to the accident

Judges:

Lord Chancellor (Finlay), Viscount Haldane, Lord Shaw, and Lord Parmoor

Citations:

[1918] UKHL 443

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

Scotland

Negligence

Updated: 11 October 2022; Ref: scu.631471

Greene v Chelsea Borough Council: CA 1954

Lord Denning MR said: ‘Knowledge or notice of the danger is only a defence when the plaintiff is free to act upon that knowledge or notice so as to avoid the danger’.

Judges:

Lord Denning MR

Citations:

[1954] 2 QBD 127

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Roles v Nathan CA 15-May-1963
Two chimney sweeps were overcome by fumes, and died in the basement of the Manchester Assembly Rooms. Whilst occupied working in flues (against advice), a boiler had been lit.
Held: (Majority – Pearson LJ dissenting) The land-owner’s appeal . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury, Land, Negligence

Updated: 07 October 2022; Ref: scu.568158

Seaton and Others v Seddon: ChD 23 Mar 2012

The claimants sought damages alleging that royalties were due to them. The defendant solicitors applied to strike out the action as against themselves as an abuse of process.

Judges:

Roth J

Citations:

[2012] EWHC 735 (Ch)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Mortgage Express v Abensons Solicitors (A Firm) ChD 20-Apr-2012
The claimant lender sought damages against the defendant solicitors alleging negligence and breach of fiduciary duty by them in acting for them on mortgage advances. The defendants now argued that the allowance of an amendment to add the allegation . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Intellectual Property, Negligence

Updated: 06 October 2022; Ref: scu.452303

Smith v Nottinghamshire Police: CA 23 Feb 2012

The claimant had been very severely injured when hit by a police car on an emergency call. She appealed against a finding that she was 75% to blame. The defendant argued that he was not liable at all.
Held:
Ward LJ discussed the Keyse case saying: ‘a close analysis of the case demonstrates, therefore, that it was very much a fact specific decision ‘depending on all the circumstances’ where ‘normally’ the driver may assume pedestrians may not ignore him and where pedestrians can ‘usually’ be expected to follow the advice of the Highway Code. I do not disagree with a word of that but the comments should not be elevated into a statement of universal principle. Each case must be judged on its own particular facts and circumstances. The driving of PC Avann was undertaken in the emergency to attend the scene of a possible assault. Preventing that assault is laudable but not at the cost of an avoidable risk of catastrophic injury caused by negligently driving to the scene of the assault.’

Judges:

Ward, Lloyd, Kitchin LJJ

Citations:

[2012] EWCA Civ 161, [2012] RTR 294

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Keyse v Commissioner of the Police for the Metropolis, Scutts CA 18-May-2001
The court considered liability where a police car on emergency duty hit Mr Scutts causing very serious injuries. The officer appealed against a finding of liability saying that the judge had declared irrelevant the fact he was on an emergency . .

Cited by:

Cited – Jackson v Murray and Another SC 18-Feb-2015
Child not entirely free of responsibility
The claimant child, left a school bus and stepped out from behind it into the path of the respondent’s car. She appealed against a finding of 70% contributory negligence.
Held: Her appeal succeeded (Majority, Lord Hodge and Lord Wilson . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Negligence, Road Traffic

Updated: 05 October 2022; Ref: scu.451474

David T Morrison and Co Ltd v ICL Plastics Ltd and Others: SCS 9 Mar 2012

Outer House – Opinion – In May 2004 an explosion at the defenders factory caused nine deaths. A pipeline carrying LPG gas had not been assessed for risks. Morrison owned neighbouring premises which were damaged. They began an action for damages. The defenders said that the claim was out of time, but the claimants said that the period for prescription did not begin until the creditor could reasonably have known that the defender might be at fault.
Held: The defence succeeded, applying the doctrine res ipsa loquitur in this particular situation. Under section 11(3) it was the pursuer who must show that it did not have actual or constructive awareness that loss caused by negligence had occurred. The question was whether Morrison knew, or could using reasonable diligence have found out, that it had a stateable prima facie claim arising out of the explosion. The identity of the obligant, the prospects of success and the precise extent of the damage were not relevant. The explosion within ICL’s factory allowed a presumption of negligence in accordance with the principle of res ipsa loquitur. In the absence of any explanation for the explosion, Morrison was entitled to infer that the owner and occupier was responsible for the explosion.

Judges:

Lord Woolman

Citations:

[2012] ScotCS CSOH – 44, 2012 SLT 813, 2012 GWD 12-236, 2012 Rep LR 118

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Prescription and Limitation (Scotland) Act 1973, Health and Safety at Work Act 1974

Jurisdiction:

Scotland

Citing:

See Also – ICL Plastics Ltd and Others, Re Application for Judicial Review SCS 11-Mar-2005
The applicants were concerned at the decision to exclude them from their premises to investigate the cause of an explosion leading to the collapse of the factory. . .

Cited by:

Appeal from – David T Morrison and Co Ltd (T/A Gael Home Interiors) v ICL Plastics Ltd and Another SCS 14-Mar-2013
Extra Division – Inner House – An explosion at the defenders’ neighbouring premises had damaged those of the pursuer. The defenders now appealed against a finding that the claim was out of time calculated from the time when it had sufficient . .
At Outer House – David T Morrison and Co Ltd (T/A Gael Home Interiors) v ICL Plastics Ltd and Others SC 30-Jul-2014
The claimant sought damages after an explosion at the defender’s nearby premises damaged its shop. The defender said that the claim was out of time, and now appealed against a decision that time had not begun to run under the 1973 Act.
Held: . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Limitation, Health and Safety, Negligence

Updated: 05 October 2022; Ref: scu.452213

Cook v Thorne and Another: CA 23 Jan 2001

Citations:

[2001] EWCA Civ 81

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Jebson v Ministry of Defence CA 28-Jun-2000
The claimant was a guardsman travelling in the rear of a service lorry. He fell from the tailgate suffering severe injury. He was drunk after a social trip.
Held: Though a person could normally expect to be responsible himself for incidents . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury, Negligence

Updated: 01 October 2022; Ref: scu.217925

Bralsford v Conoco Ltd: CA 14 Feb 1997

The employers appealed against a finding of negligence causing the plaintiff personal injury. The plaintiff lorry driver for the defendants, had his boot lace caught as he was on top of the tanker. He fell, but was left suspended.

Citations:

[1997] EWCA Civ 1017

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Vancouver General Hospital v McDaniel PC 27-Jul-1934
British Columbia A hospital owes a duty to establish adequate procedures to safeguard patients from cross-infection. Howeber it was a good defence to show that the defendants had acted in accordance with a general practice.
Lord Alness said: . .
Cited – Morris v West Hartlepool Steam Navigation HL 1956
The ship had followed a practice of leaving the between deck hatch covers off in the absence of a guard rail around the hatchway. The plaintiff seaman fell into the hold. There was evidence that on this ship it was quite usual for men to be sent . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury, Negligence

Updated: 01 October 2022; Ref: scu.141413

Cramaso Llp v Rt Hon Ian Derek Francis OgilIe-Grant, Earl of Seafield and Others: SCS 7 Dec 2011

Inner House The defenders owned a grouse moor. There had been difficulties with the grouse population, and efforts over several years to restore them. The defenders sought to find a tenant. Negotiations were conducted with Mr Erskine, and an email was sent to him making what were now seen to be misleading representations about the grouse population. Mr Erskine formed a company, the pursuer, to take a lease. The pursuer sought reduction of the lease and damages because of the reduction. It was conceded on behalf of the respondents that the Lord Ordinary had erred in considering that the non-existence of the appellant at the time when the email was sent was necessarily an insuperable obstacle to the existence of a duty of care: it was accepted that in appropriate circumstances a duty of care could be owed to a class of persons, some of whom might not then be in existence. However the defenders asserted that no possible duty of care could be owed to the pursuers.
Held: Applying Caparo, no duty of care had been owed by the respondents to the appellant.

Judges:

Lord Marnoch

Citations:

[2011] ScotCS CSIH – 81, 2012 SC 240, 2012 GWD 1-11

Links:

Bailii

Citing:

Appeal from – Cramaso Llp v Viscount Reidhaven’s Trustees SCS 11-May-2010
Outer House – The pursuer said that it had been misled into taking a lease of a grouse moor by the responders making a repesentation to Mr Erskine who had conducted negotiations, and then created the pursuer as a vehicle for the lease. He sought the . .
Cited – Caparo Industries Plc v Dickman and others HL 8-Feb-1990
Limitation of Loss from Negligent Mis-statement
The plaintiffs sought damages from accountants for negligence. They had acquired shares in a target company and, relying upon the published and audited accounts which overstated the company’s earnings, they purchased further shares.
Held: The . .

Cited by:

Appeal from – Cramaso Llp v Ogilvie-Grant, Earl of Seafield and Others SC 12-Feb-2014
The defenders owned a substantial grouse moor in Scotland. There had been difficulties with grouse stocks, and steps taken over years to allow stocks to recover. They had responded to enquiries from one Mr Erskine with misleading figures. Mr Erskine . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Scotland, Negligence

Updated: 29 September 2022; Ref: scu.449779

Revenue and Customs v Charles (T/A Boston Computer Group Europe): CA 10 Dec 2019

The Court was asked whether the Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs (‘HMRC’) can owe a common law duty of care to verify the factual accuracy of evidence relied upon in proceedings in the Tax tribunals. It arises in the context of a claim for damages brought by the Respondent in which it was alleged that HMRC was liable for breach of contract, breach of statutory duty and/or negligence in relation to matters arising from an HMRC investigation into what has become known as VAT ‘MTIC’ fraud, and the conduct of subsequent litigation.
Held: The revenue’s appeal succeeded: ‘the judge failed to apply Lord Bingham’s test in the Barclays Bank case properly. It has been decided that parties do not owe each other a duty of care in litigation.’

Citations:

[2019] EWCA Civ 2176

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Taxes Management, Negligence

Updated: 29 September 2022; Ref: scu.645550

ABB and Others v Milton Keynes Council: QBD 21 Oct 2011

The claimants, now adults, each claimed that as children, the defendant had known of the prolonged and serious sexual abuse they had suffered at the hands of their father when children, and that it had failed to protect them from it.

Judges:

Hampton J

Citations:

[2011] EWHC 2745 (QB)

Links:

Bailii

Cited by:

Cited – RAR v GGC QBD 10-Aug-2012
The claimant alleged that the defendant, her stepfather, had sexually and otherwise assaulted her when she was a child. He had pleaded guilty to one charge in 1978, and now said that the claim was out of time. The claimant sought the extension of . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Negligence, Damages

Updated: 25 September 2022; Ref: scu.447531

Surtees v Royal Borough of Kingston upon Thames: CA 27 Mar 1991

Because children can injure themselves in so many ways, someone caring for them is not universally liable for injury to a child in their care.
A duty owed in respect of a parent’s own child may be lower.

Citations:

[1991] 2 FLR 559, Independent 27-Mar-1991

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Armes v Nottinghamshire County Council SC 18-Oct-2017
The claimant had been abused as a child by foster parents with whom she had been placed by the respondent authority. The court was now asked, the Council not having been negligent, were they in any event liable having a non-delegable duty of care . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Negligence

Updated: 19 September 2022; Ref: scu.645791

KLB v British Columbia: 2 Oct 2003

Canlii (Supreme Court of Canada) Torts – Liability – Intentional torts – Abuse of children by foster parents – Whether government can be held liable for harm children suffered in foster care – Whether government negligent – Whether government vicariously liable for torts of foster parents – Whether government liable for breach of non-delegable duty – Whether government liable for breach of fiduciary duty.
Limitation of actions – Torts – Intentional torts – Abuse of children by foster parents – Whether government can be held liable for harm children suffered in foster care – Whether tort actions barred by Limitation Act – Limitation Act, R.S.B.C. 1996, c. 266, ss. 3(2), 7(1)(a)(i).
Torts – Damages – Intentional torts – Abuse of children by foster parents – Whether government can be held liable for harm children suffered in foster care – Proper basis for assessing damages for child abuse by parent or foster parent.
The court considered the difficulty of setting down a unifying principle of the idea of a non-delegable duty: ‘It may be that there is no single common law concept of non-delegable duty. Instead, the phrase seems to have been used to describe a number of situations in which special, non-delegable duties arise. If this is correct, then rather than seeking to state the doctrine in terms of a single principle, we should look to the different situations in which such duties have been found – an approach consonant with the traditional methods of the common law. In Lewis (Guardian ad litem of) v. British Columbia, 1997 CanLII 304 (SCC), [1997] 3 S.C.R. 1145, at para. 20, Cory J. suggested that these different situations comprise a ‘spectrum of liability’, and that ‘[w]ithin that spectrum there are a variety of legal obligations which may, depending on the circumstances, lead to a principal’s liability for the negligence of an independent contractor.’

Judges:

McLachlin CJ and Gonthier, Iacobucci, Major, Bastarache, Binnie, Arbour, LeBel and Deschamps JJ

Citations:

[2003] SCC 51, [2003] SCJ No 51, [2003] 2 SCR 403

Links:

Canlii

Jurisdiction:

Canada

Cited by:

Cited – Woodland v The Swimming Teachers’ Association and Others QBD 17-Oct-2011
The court was asked as to the vicarious or other liability of a school where a pupil suffered injury at a swimming lesson with a non-employee during school time, and in particular whether it had a non-delegable duty to ensure the welfare of children . .
Cited – NA v Nottinghamshire County Council QBD 2-Dec-2014
The claimant said that as a child the defendant had failed in its duty to protect her from her abusive mother and later from foster parents.
Held: Males J, dealt with the issues of liability and limitation, leaving issues concerning causation . .
Cited – Armes v Nottinghamshire County Council SC 18-Oct-2017
The claimant had been abused as a child by foster parents with whom she had been placed by the respondent authority. The court was now asked, the Council not having been negligent, were they in any event liable having a non-delegable duty of care . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Commonwealth, Negligence

Updated: 19 September 2022; Ref: scu.445627

Micklewright v Surrey County Council: CA 28 Jul 2011

A branch overhanging the road, fell off causing a death. His PR claimed damages, but failed in the County Court. The death of an individual killed by a branch falling from a tree overhanging the highway was not attributable to the negligence of the local authority. The judge found that extensive internal decay was a major factor in the branch’s fall. He found that nobody had seen any external signs of decay and he found that, even if the local authority had had in place a proper system of inspection, the extent of the decay, and the danger it posed, would not have been revealed.
Held: The appeal was dismissed. Hedley J focused on the two stages of the judge’s enquiry: namely whether a routine inspection would have led on to a detailed inspection by a qualified arboriculturalist and, if so, whether that expert’s inspection would have led to the removal of the branch. Hedley J said that the judge’s findings made it probable that, had the outcome of a preliminary inspection warranted an inspection by an expert, then the later, detailed inspection would have revealed the extent of the decay and would have led to the removal of the branch. Thus, he said, the critical issue was whether or not the judge had been right to find that no expert inspection had been warranted, because a preliminary inspection would not have given rise to any cause for concern. The Court of Appeal concluded that, on the facts, the judge had been right to reach that conclusion.

Judges:

Mummery, Patten LJJ, Hedley J

Citations:

[2011] EWCA Civ 922

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Law Reform (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1934, Fatal Accidents Act 1976

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Stagecoach South Western Trains Ltd v Hind and Another TCC 11-Jun-2014
A train crash was caused when an ash tree fell from the defendant’s land across the railway line. The company sought damages from the land-owner.
Held: The land-owner’s duty extended no further than the carrying out of periodic informal or . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury, Negligence

Updated: 17 September 2022; Ref: scu.442527

New South Wales v Lepore: 6 Feb 2003

Austlii (High Court of Australia) 1. Appeal allowed in part
2. Paragraph 2 of the order of the Court of Appeal of New South Wales made on 23 April 2001 set aside, and in its place, order that the judgment entered in the District Court on 16 April 1999 be wholly set aside and that there be a new trial.
3. Appellant to pay the costs of the appeal to this Court.
4. Costs of the new trial to abide its outcome.
Callian J (majority) said: ‘Education authorities do not owe to children for whose education they are responsible (absent relevant contractual provision to the contrary) a particular or unique non-delegable duty of care, in practical terms, giving rise to absolute liability. There is no doubt that the ordinary standard of care in the case of such authorities is a very high one. Their duties include the engagement of reliable, and carefully screened, properly trained employees, and the provision: of suitable premises; an adequate system for the monitoring of employees; and, I would think, because, regrettably, the incidence of sexual abuse seems to have been more common than had previously been thought, an efficient system for the prevention and detection of misconduct of that kind. In saying what I have, I do not intend to state comprehensively a catalogue of the duties to which the relationship of education authority and pupil may give rise. But I do agree with the Chief Justice that absent fault on the part of an education authority, it will not be personally liable in situations of the kind with which these cases are concerned’.
McHugh J. (minority: he alone would have found non-delegable duties in the particular circumstances) said: ‘a State education authority owes a duty to a pupil to take reasonable care to prevent harm to the pupil. The duty cannot be delegated. If, as is invariably the case, the State delegates the performance of the duty to a teacher, the State is liable if the teacher fails to take reasonable care to prevent harm to the pupil . . The duty arises on the enrolment of the child. It is not confined to school hours or to the commencement of the teachers’ hours of employment at the school. If the authority permits a pupil to be in the school grounds before the hours during which teachers are on duty, the authority will be liable if the pupil is injured through lack of reasonable supervision. In Geyer v Downs this Court held that the education authority was liable for injuries suffered by a pupil playing in the school grounds at about 8.45am although teachers at the school were not required to be on duty at that time . . The duty extends to protecting the pupil from the conduct of other pupils or strangers and from the pupil’s own conduct The measure of the duty is not that which could be expected of a careful parent.
Murphy and Aickin JJ rejected the parent analogy in Geyer v Downs saying that it was unreal to apply that standard to ‘a schoolmaster who has the charge of a school with some 400 children, or of a master who takes a class of thirty or more children’.

Judges:

Gleeson CJ, Gaudron, Mchugh, Gummow, Kirby, Hayne and Callinan JJ

Citations:

[2003] HCA 4, (2003) 212 CLR 511, (2003) 195 ALR 412, (2003) 77 ALJR 558, (2003) 24 Leg Rep 2

Links:

Austlii

Jurisdiction:

Australia

Cited by:

Cited – Woodland v The Swimming Teachers’ Association and Others QBD 17-Oct-2011
The court was asked as to the vicarious or other liability of a school where a pupil suffered injury at a swimming lesson with a non-employee during school time, and in particular whether it had a non-delegable duty to ensure the welfare of children . .
Cited – NA v Nottinghamshire County Council CA 12-Nov-2015
Appeal against finding that a local authority was not responsible for the sexual abuse of the appellant whilst with foster carers as a child.
Held: As to whether the duty as non-delegable, such a duty must relate to a function which the local . .
Cited – Armes v Nottinghamshire County Council SC 18-Oct-2017
The claimant had been abused as a child by foster parents with whom she had been placed by the respondent authority. The court was now asked, the Council not having been negligent, were they in any event liable having a non-delegable duty of care . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Negligence

Updated: 16 September 2022; Ref: scu.445625

Perry and Another v Harris (A Minor): CA 31 Jul 2008

The defendant had organised a children’s party. The claimant (11) was injured when a bigger boy was allowed to use the bouncy castle at the same time. The defendants appealed the award of damages.
Held: The appeal succeeded. The relevant standard of care was that which a reasonably careful parent would show for her own children: ‘It is quite impractical for parents to keep children under constant surveillance or even supervision and it would not be in the public interest for the law to impose a duty upon them to do so. Some circumstances or activities may, however, involve an unacceptable risk to children unless they are subject to supervision, or even constant surveillance. Adults who expose children to such circumstances or activities are likely to be held responsible for ensuring that they are subject to such supervision or surveillance as they know, or ought to know, is necessary to restrict the risk to an acceptable level.’ The judge had stated the duty of care too highly.
Lord Phillips CJ said: ‘A reasonable parent could foresee that if children indulged in boisterous behaviour on a bouncy castle, there would be a risk that, sooner or later, one child might collide with another and cause that child some physical injury of a type that can be an incident of some contact sports. We do not consider that it was reasonably foreseeable that such injury would be likely to be serious, let alone as severe as the injury sustained by the claimant.’

Judges:

Lord Phillips of Worth Matravers LCJ, May LJ, Wilson LJ

Citations:

[2009] 1 WLR 19, [2008] EWCA Civ 907, Times 25-Aug-2008

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – Harris v Perry and others QBD 8-May-2008
The claimant was a child. He was at a friend’s birthday party when he was severely injured on a bouncy castle. He was ten years old and another child who was fifteen. The unit was unsupervised. The parents denied that the claimant had been given . .

Cited by:

Cited – Cockbill v Riley QBD 22-Mar-2013
The claimant sufferd catastrophic injury diving into a paddling pool at a party held by the defendant for his daughter to celebrate completing her GCSEs.
Held: The claim failed. ‘It was reasonably foreseeable that someone would lose his . .
Cited – Williams v Williams (The Estate of) CA 30-Apr-2013
A child aged three had been injured as a passenger in her mother’s car when it was hit by another negligently driven vehicle. The mother appealed against a finding that she was 25% contributorily negligent in that the child seat used had been . .
Cited – Armes v Nottinghamshire County Council SC 18-Oct-2017
The claimant had been abused as a child by foster parents with whom she had been placed by the respondent authority. The court was now asked, the Council not having been negligent, were they in any event liable having a non-delegable duty of care . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury, Negligence

Updated: 16 September 2022; Ref: scu.272242

Harris v Perry and others: QBD 8 May 2008

The claimant was a child. He was at a friend’s birthday party when he was severely injured on a bouncy castle. He was ten years old and another child who was fifteen. The unit was unsupervised. The parents denied that the claimant had been given permission to go on the castle.
Held: The parents who organised the party were liable in negligence. The hire company had advised them both to supervise the equipment and to avoid the kind of behavior which had caused the accident.

Judges:

David Steel J

Citations:

[2008] EWHC 990 (QB)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Appeal from – Perry and Another v Harris (A Minor) CA 31-Jul-2008
The defendant had organised a children’s party. The claimant (11) was injured when a bigger boy was allowed to use the bouncy castle at the same time. The defendants appealed the award of damages.
Held: The appeal succeeded. The relevant . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury, Negligence

Updated: 16 September 2022; Ref: scu.267562