levo

Tort: Negligence

Duty of care and the neighbour principle

  • 3 things to know
  • Components 2 and 3

Overview

Donoghue v Stevenson and the neighbour principle, the rise and fall of the Anns test, and where the duty stops — Bourhill v Young, omissions, third parties and Kent v Griffiths.

What you need to know

Answer each one before you reveal it.

Your recallNot started
Key term

What three elements must a claimant prove in negligence?

Key term

State the neighbour principle.

Numbers

Give the classic definition of negligence.

Questions from this subtopic

Each one with the model answer underneath.

  1. 1

    What three elements must a claimant prove in negligence?

    Model answer

    A claimant in negligence must prove that the defendant owed a duty of care. The claimant must then prove a breach of that duty. The claimant must finally prove that the breach caused damage that is not too remote.

  2. 2

    Give the classic definition of negligence.

    Model answer

    Blyth v Birmingham Waterworks (1856) defined negligence as the omission to do something a reasonable man would do. Negligence also covers doing something a prudent and reasonable man would not do.

  3. 3

    What were the facts and the decision in Donoghue v Stevenson [1932]?

    Model answer

    Donoghue v Stevenson [1932] concerned a decomposed snail in an opaque bottle of ginger beer. The House of Lords held that a manufacturer owes a duty of care to the ultimate consumer of the product.

  4. 4

    State the neighbour principle.

    Model answer

    Lord Atkin's neighbour principle requires a person to take reasonable care to avoid acts likely to injure a neighbour. A neighbour is anyone so closely and directly affected by the act. The actor ought reasonably to have such a person in contemplation.

  5. 5

    Why was the neighbour principle so important to the development of negligence?

    Model answer

    The neighbour principle supplied one general test in place of a list of separate duty situations. Negligence could then expand into new relationships as they arose.

  6. 6

    What two-stage test did Anns v Merton London Borough Council [1978] lay down?

    Model answer

    Anns v Merton London Borough Council [1978] asked first whether there was enough proximity to raise a prima facie duty. The court then asked whether any policy consideration should reduce or negative that duty.

Other ways to work this

The same content, four other ways.

What is inside Levo

Six ways to work the same material.

1Closed book
2Open book
3Closed book

The 3-step method, run for you

Answer cold, learn it, then prove it stuck. Levo tracks the jump between your first attempt and your last.

Parliamentary and European Law Making
Delegated Legislation
Statutory Interpretation
Judicial Precedent

Cram a whole paper in one sitting

Sort every topic into what you know and what you do not, then drill only the weak ones.

The court sits in .
StrasbourgLondonParis

Blank Blitz makes facts automatic

Rapid timed gap-fills on the terms and numbers you need to recall without thinking.

AAn interim injunction restrains publication before trial.
BPublication cannot be undone.
CAn injunction may be the only effective remedy.

Build It gets the exam shape right

Assemble a full-mark answer from its marking points, in the order an examiner wants them.

A Public Bill changes the general law.
TrueFalse

Test It catches misconceptions

Spot the fault in a statement. The traps are the mistakes students actually make.

721941163128510

Brain Breaks between sessions

Short focus games to reset attention, so the next set lands better than the last.

Every question in Tort: Negligence, on a schedule.

Attempt a question from memory, write the correct version, then attempt it again. Levo records the jump between your first attempt and your last, and brings each question back on the day you are due to forget it.

Or £46 a year, about £3.83 a month. Cancel anytime.