TOPICS

Tort, Negligence, Liability

The elements of liability for Negligence; 14.1.1.

The sources of the law of Negligence; 14.1.2.

'Trespass' and 'Actions on the case'; 14.2.1.

The necessity of distinguishing the nature of particular conduct and harm; 14.3.1.

Restricting liability for careless conduct causing harm; 14.3.2.

The reasons for restricting liability; 14.3.3.

Tort, Negligence, the existence of a duty of care

The foreseeablity of harm; 14.4.1.

How liability for careless conduct causing harm is limited; 14.4.1.

The requirement of foreseeable harm; 14.4.1.1.

Foreseeing particular harm; 14.4.1.2 .

How foreseeability of harm is determined; 14.4.1.3.

Determining who might foreseeably be harmed; 14.4.1.4.

The foreseeability of psychiatric harm; 14.4.1.5.

Tort, Negligence, duty situations

How the courts establish a duty situation or relationship; 14.4.2.1.

Recognised duty situations or relationships; 14.4.2.2.

Plaintiffs with accentuated susceptibility to harm; 14.4.3.2.

Rescuers; 14.4.3.3.

Statutory authorities; 14.4.3.4.

Manufacturers; 14.4.3.5.

Occupiers; 14.4.3.6.

Employees; 14.4.3.7.

The 'unborn' plaintiff; 14.4.3.8.

A failure to act that causes harm; 14.4.3.9.

Institutions caring for children; 14.4.3.10.

Negligent misstatements causing purely economic loss; 14.4.3.11.

Establishing 'reasonable reliance' on a negligent misstatement; 14.4.3.12.

The need to establish the 'vulnerability' of the plaintiff; 14.4.3.13.

Liability for negligent misstatements passed on to a third party; 14.4.3.14.

Cases that do not fall within a recognised duty situation or relationship; 14.4.2.3.

Immunity from liability; 14.4.2.4.

Tort, Negligence, breach of a duty of care

Establishing a breach; 14.5.1.

The obligation to prevent harm to the plaintiff ; 14.5.1.1.

What harm must be foreseeable to a defendant who owes a duty of care; 14..1.2.

The test by which the foreseeability of harm is determined?; 14.5.1.3.

Legislative provisions; 14.5.1.4.

The relevance of a defendant's particular knowledge; 14.5.1.5.

The relevance of a defendant's professional expertise; 14.5.1.6.

The relevance of a defendant's youthfulness; 14.5.1.7.

The relevance of a defendant's mental illness; 14.5.1.8.

The relevance of inexperience or lack of skill; 14.5.1.9.

Tort, Negligence, avoiding a breach of a duty of care

Taking reasonable steps to avoid harm; 14.5.2.1.

The probability of harm; 14.5.2.3.

The seriousness of harm; 14.5.2.4.

Practicality of avoiding harm; 14.5.2.5.

Justifiability; 14.5.2.6.

Policy considerations; 14.5.2.7.

The onus of proving a breach of a duty of care; 14.5.3.1.

Drawing justifiable inferences from the facts; 14.5.3.2.

The principle of 'res ipsa loquitur'; 14.5.3.3 - 14.5.3.4.

Tort, Negligence, causation

Establishing the cause of particular harm; 14.6.1.

The concept of 'actionable' harm; 14.6.1.1.

Distinguishing different types of harm; 14.6.1.2 – 4.  

The sufficiency of harm; 14.6.1.5.

Proving the link between 'cause' and 'harm'; 14.6.2.1.

The concept of causation; 14.6.2.2.

Single causes of harm; 14.6.2.3.

Combined causes of harm; 14.6.2.4.

Multiple independent causes of harm; 14.6.2.5.

Assessing the full extent of harm; 14.6.2.6.

Omissions causing harm; 14.6.2.7.

New intervening causes of harm; 14.6.2.8.

Immediate and remote harm; 14.6.2.9.

Causation of psychiatric harm; 14.6.2.10.

The foreseeablity of the harm caused; 14.6.3.1.

Reasonable foreseeability of consequences; 14.6.3.2.

Unforeseeable harm caused; 14.6.3.3.

The 'eggshell skull' rule; 14.6.3.4.

Tort, Negligence,  defences

Possible grounds for avoiding liability ; 14.7.1.

Contributory negligence; 14.7.2.

Apportionment legislation; 14.7.3.

Situations in which a plaintiff assumes the risk of harm; 14.7.4.

Voluntary assumption of risk in common law; 14.7.5.

Legislative reform of the assumption of risk; 14.7.6.