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.



Tags
#causation #law #negligence #tort
Question
Corr v IBC Vehicles [2008] 2 WLR 499
Answer
Mr Corr suffered a severe head injury in an accident at work. This not only caused physical injuries, but also led to significant psychological symptoms, including post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and depression. Six years after the accident, he killed himself. Defence counsel argued that, except where the defendant had a specific responsibility to prevent the claimant from actively harming himself, the act of the injured person in committing suicide would amount to a novus actus unless he or she was legally insane, and therefore not in control of his actions. The House of Lords rejected this approach.

Mr Corr's suicide was not a voluntary, informed decision taken by him as an adult of sound mind making and giving effect to a personal decision about his future. It was the response of a man suffering from a severely depressive illness which impaired his capacity to make reasoned and informed judgments about his future, such illness being, as is accepted, a consequence of the employer's tort. It is in no way unfair to hold the employer responsible for this dire consequence of its breach of duty, although it could well be thought unfair to the victim not to do so [per Lord Bingham].


Tags
#causation #law #negligence #tort
Question
Corr v IBC Vehicles [2008] 2 WLR 499
Answer
?

Tags
#causation #law #negligence #tort
Question
Corr v IBC Vehicles [2008] 2 WLR 499
Answer
Mr Corr suffered a severe head injury in an accident at work. This not only caused physical injuries, but also led to significant psychological symptoms, including post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and depression. Six years after the accident, he killed himself. Defence counsel argued that, except where the defendant had a specific responsibility to prevent the claimant from actively harming himself, the act of the injured person in committing suicide would amount to a novus actus unless he or she was legally insane, and therefore not in control of his actions. The House of Lords rejected this approach.

Mr Corr's suicide was not a voluntary, informed decision taken by him as an adult of sound mind making and giving effect to a personal decision about his future. It was the response of a man suffering from a severely depressive illness which impaired his capacity to make reasoned and informed judgments about his future, such illness being, as is accepted, a consequence of the employer's tort. It is in no way unfair to hold the employer responsible for this dire consequence of its breach of duty, although it could well be thought unfair to the victim not to do so [per Lord Bingham].

If you want to change selection, open original toplevel document below and click on "Move attachment"

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
The effect of the suicide of the victim was also considered in Corr v IBC Vehicles [2008] 2 WLR 499. Unlike Reeves and Kirkham, the duty of care owed by the defendant in this case did not relate specifically to a responsibility to prevent the claimant’s suicide. Mr Corr suffered a sev

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs

Summary

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Details

No repetitions


Discussion

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