Site icon swarb.co.uk

Wakelin v London and South Western Railway Co: HL 1886

The liability of a defendant in negligence must rest in the first place on there being, per Lord Watson) ‘some negligent act or omission on the part of the company or their servants which materially contributed to the injury or death complained of . . Mere allegation or proof that the company were guilty of negligence is altogether irrelevant; they might be guilty of many negligent acts or omissions, which might possibly have occasioned injury to somebody, but had no connection whatever with the injury for which redress is sought, and therefore the plaintiff must allege and prove, not merely that they were negligent, but that their negligence caused or materially contributed to the injury.’

Lord Watson, Lord Halsbury LC
(1886) 12 App Cas 41
England and Wales
Cited by:
CitedWilsher v Essex Area Health Authority HL 24-Jul-1986
A premature baby suffered injury after mistaken treatment by a hospital doctor. He had inserted a monitor into the umbilical vein. The claimant suggested the treatment should have been by a more senior doctor. The hospital appealed a finding that it . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury, Negligence

Leading Case

Updated: 31 October 2021; Ref: scu.272565

Exit mobile version