Eduqas A-Level Law A150QS
Parliamentary and European Law Making
Delegated Legislation
Statutory Interpretation
Judicial Precedent
The Civil Courts and Civil Process
The Criminal Process
Legal Personnel
Access to Justice and Funding
Contract: Rules and Theory of Contract LawContract
Contract: Essential Requirements and FormationContract
Contract: Express and Implied TermsContract
Contract: Misrepresentation and Economic DuressContract
Contract: Discharge of ContractContract
Contract: RemediesContract
Tort: Rules and Theory of Tort LawTort
Tort: NegligenceTort
Tort: Occupiers' LiabilityTort
Tort: Torts Connected to LandTort
Tort: Vicarious LiabilityTort
Tort: Defences and RemediesTort
Criminal Law: Rules and TheoryCriminal
Criminal Law: General Elements of LiabilityCriminal
Criminal Law: Offences Against the PersonCriminal
Criminal Law: Property OffencesCriminal
Criminal Law: Capacity DefencesCriminal
Criminal Law: Necessity Defences and Preliminary OffencesCriminal
Human Rights: Rules and TheoryHuman rights
Human Rights: Protection of Rights and Freedoms in the UKHuman rights
Human Rights: Convention ProvisionsHuman rights
Human Rights: Restrictions on Convention RightsHuman rights
Human Rights: EnforcementHuman rights
Human Rights: ReformHuman rights
Tort: Negligence
Risk factors in deciding breach
- 3 things to know
- Components 2 and 3
Overview
The four things a court weighs — likelihood, seriousness, the cost of precautions and social utility — through Bolton v Stone, Paris v Stepney, Latimer, Watt and Roe, and the rule against judging with hindsight.
What you need to know
Answer each one before you reveal it.
What did Latimer v AEC Ltd [1953] decide?
Name four factors a court weighs in deciding whether the standard of care was met.
Questions from this subtopic
Each one with the model answer underneath.
- 1
Name four factors a court weighs in deciding whether the standard of care was met.
Model answer
A court weighs the likelihood of harm and the seriousness of the possible injury. A court also weighs the cost and practicality of precautions and the social utility of the defendant's activity.
- 2
What did Bolton v Stone [1951] decide?
Model answer
Bolton v Stone [1951] concerned a cricket ball hit out of the ground about six times in thirty years. The House of Lords held there was no breach, because the risk of injury was very small.
- 3
How does a higher likelihood of harm affect what the defendant must do?
Model answer
A defendant must take greater precautions as the risk of harm rises. Miller v Jackson [1977] concerned cricket balls landing in a neighbouring garden several times each season. The risk there was real and foreseeable rather than remote.
- 4
What did Paris v Stepney Borough Council [1951] decide?
Model answer
Paris v Stepney Borough Council [1951] concerned a workman with sight in one eye who was blinded by a metal chip. The House of Lords held the employer should have supplied goggles, because the potential injury to him was far graver.
- 5
How does the seriousness of the possible harm affect the precautions required?
Model answer
The graver the possible injury, the greater the precautions a reasonable person takes. A known vulnerability in the claimant raises the standard owed to that claimant.
- 6
What did Latimer v AEC Ltd [1953] decide?
Model answer
Latimer v AEC Ltd [1953] concerned a factory floor made slippery by a flood. The employer had spread sawdust over most of the floor, and closing the factory would have been out of proportion to the risk.
Other ways to work this
The same content, four other ways.
What is inside Levo
Six ways to work the same material.
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.