United Kingdom Tort Law: Negligence, Strict and Specific Torts Essay
Serving as an umbrella term for the compensation process, the UK tort law addresses both professional negligence and general liability, also referred to as non-professional negligence. The UK tort law comprises three major concepts: negligence, strict and specific torts, and vicarious liability. The two latter sections provide a rationale for a principal difference between professional and non-professional negligence.
As far as negligence is concerned, it is of paramount importance to outline that the standards of care for professional negligence differ from ordinary cases. According to the Occupiers’ Liability Act, every occupier who provides services or property to society is expected to present a minimum duty of care 1 . Such a decision is justified by the fact that one’s professional competence implies a certain level of skills and expertise in the field. For example, in a clinical context, one’s failure to provide quality assessment cannot be justified by lack of experience. In FB v Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust , a junior doctor who failed to diagnose a child with pneumococcal meningitis was regarded as negligent 2 . Another case of doctoral negligence, Darnley v Croydon Health Services NHS Trust 3 , demonstrates that providing the patient with misleading information, when causing harm to one’s health, should be compensated by the occupier.
The duty of care principle is a central concept of the tort law, as it implies that one individual accepts the duty to guarantee safety and the absence of harm to another individual. The landmark for the duty of care is the Donoghue v Stevenson case, where the plaintiff accused the defendant of negligence because she felt ill after drinking a ginger beer with a decomposed snail inside 4 . Another example of a breach of duty of care is Robinson v Chief Constable of West Yorkshire Police , as this case demonstrates how the plaintiff was remedied for an injury that was received during the police officers’ attempt to arrest a drug-dealer 5 . Hence, these incidents demonstrate that people and bodies providing services to others bear a higher level of public responsibility for safety and overall well-being.
However, once the minimal duty of care for occupiers’ defence is ignored, the responsibility for possible harm no longer belongs solely to the occupier or the property owner. For example, in Roles v Nathan , two chimney workers died due to a carbon monoxide-related fire. 6 The defendant was not found guilty because, as an occupier, he gave the workers three warnings, and they were not expected to proceed to work in a hazardous environment. A similar decision was held by the court in Tomlinson v Congleton BC , as the plaintiff accused the city council of harm to his physical and mental health as a result of diving in a local park’s lake 7 . However, while the visitors were not expected to swim in a lake in the first place, the duty of care charges were irrelevant.
Undeniably, there are claims that non-professional negligence, sometimes causing more detrimental effects, should not be regarded as an ordinary case. For example, in Mulholland v Medway NHS Foundation Trust , misdiagnosed brain tumour was not regarded explicitly as professional negligence, as the outcomes of treatment would not be much different in the long term 8 . However, when dealing with professional care, it is necessary to realize that the harm caused by an occupier was either intentional or the one demonstrating lack of proper expertise the in field.
While the duty of care should be minimal, the UK tort law promotes the rule of the eggshell skull, according to which the victim’s natural predisposition or vulnerability does not undermine the scope of negligence. For example, in Smith v Leech Brain & Co Ltd 9 , the plaintiff’s natural predisposition to cancer was not the reason for the claimant to have no compensation allowance. Thus, considering the UK tort law system, it becomes evident that professional negligence is regarded from a more complex and rigorous perspective due to the expertise level required to provide a service, as compared to the non-professional negligence.
- Occupiers’ Liability Act 1957
- FB v Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust [2017] EWCA Civ 334
- Darnley v Croydon Health Services NHS Trust [2018] UKSC 50
- Donoghue v Stevenson [1932] UKHL 100
- Robinson v Chief Constable of West Yorkshire Police [2018] UKSC 4
- Roles v. Nathan [1963] 1 W.L.R. 1117, [1963] 2 All E.R. 908
- Tomlinson v Congleton Borough Council [2003] UKHL 47
- Mulholland v Medway NHS Foundation Trust. [2015] EWHC 268
- Smith v Leech Brain & Co [1962] 2 QB 405
- Chicago (A-D)
- Chicago (N-B)
IvyPanda. (2024, March 3). United Kingdom Tort Law: Negligence, Strict and Specific Torts. https://ivypanda.com/essays/united-kingdom-tort-law-negligence-strict-and-specific-torts/
"United Kingdom Tort Law: Negligence, Strict and Specific Torts." IvyPanda , 3 Mar. 2024, ivypanda.com/essays/united-kingdom-tort-law-negligence-strict-and-specific-torts/.
IvyPanda . (2024) 'United Kingdom Tort Law: Negligence, Strict and Specific Torts'. 3 March.
IvyPanda . 2024. "United Kingdom Tort Law: Negligence, Strict and Specific Torts." March 3, 2024. https://ivypanda.com/essays/united-kingdom-tort-law-negligence-strict-and-specific-torts/.
1. IvyPanda . "United Kingdom Tort Law: Negligence, Strict and Specific Torts." March 3, 2024. https://ivypanda.com/essays/united-kingdom-tort-law-negligence-strict-and-specific-torts/.
Bibliography
IvyPanda . "United Kingdom Tort Law: Negligence, Strict and Specific Torts." March 3, 2024. https://ivypanda.com/essays/united-kingdom-tort-law-negligence-strict-and-specific-torts/.
- Judicial Precedent: Donoghue v. Stevenson and Grant v. Australian Knitting Mills Ltd Cases
- The F&B Restaurant
- Lorraine Gallagher vs Secretary of State for the Home Department
- “Mulholland Drive” by David Lynch: Symbolism of Color
- The Tort Law Role in Business Activities
- Singapore Contract Law Analysis
- Saudi Female Students' Facebook Usage
- Court Cases Showing Various Law Arguments
- Collaborating with Non-Professional Care Giver
- Job Description of a Food and Beverage Manager in Australia
- Perjury: Two Types With Different Aspects
- Informed Consent and Its Importance
- Are UK and US Laws Similar or Different?
- Impact of Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Act 2007
- Clarence Thomas’s Quote on Legal Realism
IMAGES
VIDEO
COMMENTS
The Tort of Negligence. The Tort of Negligence is a legal wrong that is suffered by someone at the hands of another who fails to take proper care to avoid what a reasonable person would regard as a foreseeable risk. In many cases there will be a contractual relationship (express or implied) between the parties involved, such as that of doctor ...
Negligence Per Se. Negligence per se is applied when conduct that is a violation of a law (whether a criminal statute, ordinance, or administrative order) causes harm. Because violating the law is inherently considered negligent behavior, that the defendant violated the law inherently proves that he breached his responsibility.
Tort Law: Negligence and Liability Essay. The Webster dictionary defines tort as an action which causes harm to other people (Fleming, 1992). It can also be termed as a civil wrong caused when individuals indulge themselves in unreasonable actions. Tort claims are based on the belief that people should always take responsibility of their ...
The law of negligence was established in the landmark case, Donoghue v Stevenson 1. Since then, it is evident that the law of negligence developed incrementally, through the cases that followed such as Anns v Merton London Borough Council 2 and Caparo Industries plc v Dickman 3.
The Tort of Negligence Essay. Exclusively available on IvyPanda Available only on IvyPanda. Updated: Mar 2nd, 2024. Table of Contents. The Law of Tort; Standard and Duty of Care; References; The Law of Tort. A tort is an act, which causes harm to a person, may be intentional or not and it must contrary to the law or to a specific duty or ...
1556 Words. 7 Pages. Open Document. Torts of negligence are breaches of duty that results to injury to another person to whom the duty breached is owed. Like all other torts, the requirements for this are duty, breach of duty by the defendant, causation and injury (Stuhmcke and Corporation.E 2001). However, this form of tort differs from ...
'Negligence' in tort law is the failure to take reasonable care to avoid causing injury or loss to another person. Someone who claims negligence must prove three-things; the defendant owed the claimant a duty of care; the defendant was in breach of his/her duty and the breach caused damage to the claimant 1.
Tort of Negligence Essay Example. Throughout the course of this report, to determine if the plaintiff is owed a duty of care in negligence, we will adhere by the Singapore single test of negligence laid out in the case of Spandeck Engineering (S) Pte Ltd v Defence Science & Technology Agency [2007] SGCA 37; [2007] 4 SLR 100, which states that ...
1 Structure of the tort. Negligence of course means carelessness, but in 1934 Lord Wright said: 'In strict legal analysis, negligence means more than heedless or careless conduct, whether in omission or commission: it properly connotes the complex concept of duty, breach and damage thereby suffered by the person to whom the duty was owing.
Tort Law of Negligence. Torts of negligence are breaches of duty that results to injury to another person to whom the duty breached is owed. Like all other torts, the requirements for this are duty, breach of duty by the defendant, causation and injury (Stuhmcke and Corporation. E 2001). However, this form of tort differs from intentional tort ...
SELECTED ANSWER B. 1. H's claims against D and D's defenses. Harry (H) will file a claim for negligence against Doug (D) Negligence To successfully assert a negligence claim, the plaintiff must show that the defendant (i) had a duty, (ii) breached that duty, (iii) the breach of that duty was the actual and proximate cause of the plaintiff's ...
A tort is a wrongdoing by a citizen towards another for which he/she is tried in the court of law. The plaintiff is the person against whom the wrong has been committed and who has suffered losses. Whereas, the person because of whom the damages/losses have occurred to the plaintiff is known as the defendant.
Tort Law Essay- Negligence; W:C 7th Prob Question; Related Studylists Tort of negligence tort LoT Essays. Preview text 'Negligence' in tort is the failure to take reasonable care to avoid causing injury/loss to another person. Someone who claims negligence must prove three-things; the defendant owed the claimant a duty of care (DOC); the ...
This publication contains the four essay questions from the October 2017 California First-Year Law Students' Examination and two selected answers for each question. The answers were assigned high grades and were written by applicants who passed the examination. The answers were produced as submitted by the applicant, except that minor ...
The UK tort law comprises three major concepts: negligence, strict and specific torts, and vicarious liability. The two latter sections provide a rationale for a principal difference between professional and non-professional negligence. As far as negligence is concerned, it is of paramount importance to outline that the standards of care for ...
Negligence is the omission to do something which a reasonable man, guided upon those considerations which ordinarily regulate the conduct of human affairs, would do, or do something which a reasonable prudent man would not do.[10] In the case of the reasonable person it was found that any action that has been taken, would take reasonable care ...
Laws of Tort - essay; The first element of negligence is to determine if Lola Suffered actionable damage; CPA Liability Essay - With reference to the Consumer Protection Act 1987, explain how far it is true; Tort non-assesed - Grade: 2:2; Tort Law Midsummer Exam 2020 - Grade: 65; Tort Law Midsummer Exam 2020 - Grade: 68
1154 Words5 Pages. Tort of negligence is the failure to act as a reasonable person to exercise the standard of care required by the law and resulting in damage to the party to whom the duty was owed. To prove negligence, the claimant must show that the defendant causing the damage was not only the actual cause of damage.
Nicholas J McBride and Roderick Bagshaw Tort Law (4th edn, Pearson Education Limited, 2012), 92-327. W. E. Peel and J. Goudkamp Tort (19th edn, Sweet & Maxwell, 2014), 77-206. Answer 2 A General Outline of the Tort of Negligence. In order to analyse this problem, it is helpful to start by outlining the elements of the tort of negligence.