Do you want BuboFlash to help you learning these things? Or do you want to add or correct something? Click here to log in or create user.

#law #negligence #remoteness #tort
Finally, in Lagden v O’Connor [2004] 1 AC 1067 the House of Lords overruled the decision in Liesbosch. Lagden v O’Connor concerned the recovery of hire charges by a claimant who hired a vehicle on credit while waiting for the defendant’s insurers to repair his car. The claimant stated that he could not afford to pay for the repairs himself. The defendant argued that the principle in Liesbosch prevented recovery of the hire charges. The majority in the House of Lords observed that Liesbosch had been decided when the test of remoteness was that of directness, as laid down in Re Polemis. The Law Lords referred to the modern test of reasonable foreseeability, and that the tortfeasor most take his victim as he finds him. This ‘thin skull’ rule applied equally to the claimant’s financial health as to his physical or mental state.
If you want to change selection, open document below and click on "Move attachment"


cannot see any pdfs


statusnot read reprioritisations
last reprioritisation on suggested re-reading day
started reading on finished reading on



Do you want to join discussion? Click here to log in or create user.