Edited, memorised or added to reading list

on 24-Jul-2016 (Sun)

Do you want BuboFlash to help you learning these things? Click here to log in or create user.

#contract #law #remedies
In Lambert v Lewis [1982] AC 255, the intervening act was not deemed 'likely to happen' and so broke the chain of causation. In this case, a dealer supplied a defective trailer coupling to a customer who went on using it, after it was obviously broken, until there was an accident. It was held that the dealer was not liable as the accident had been caused by the customer's use of the coupling when he knew that it was broken, and not by the fact that it was defective when sold.

statusnot read reprioritisations
last reprioritisation on reading queue position [%]
started reading on finished reading on

pdf

cannot see any pdfs




Flashcard 1372196572428

Tags
#law #negligence #tort #vicarious-liability
Question
An employer is not responsible for the wrongful acts of his employee unless such acts are done in the course of employment. Winfield defines the phrase ‘course of employment’ in the following terms: An employee is in the course of employment if the wrongful act is: (3)
Answer
  1. expressly or impliedly authorised by the employer; or,
  2. incidental to the carrying out of the employee’s proper duties; or,
  3. an unauthorised way of doing something authorised by the employer.


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
An employer is not responsible for the wrongful acts of his employee unless such acts are done in the course of employment. Winfield defines the phrase ‘course of employment’ in the following terms: An employee is in the course of employment if the wrongful act is: expressly or impliedly authorised by the employer; or, incidental to the carrying out of the employee’s proper duties; or, an unauthorised way of doing something authorised by the employ

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372198931724

Tags
#law #negligence #tort #vicarious-liability
Question
An employer is not responsible for the wrongful acts of his employee unless such acts are done in the course of employment. [...] defines the phrase ‘course of employment’ in the following terms: An employee is in the course of employment if the wrongful act is:
  1. expressly or impliedly authorised by the employer; or,
  2. incidental to the carrying out of the employee’s proper duties; or,
  3. an unauthorised way of doing something authorised by the employer.
Answer
Winfield


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
An employer is not responsible for the wrongful acts of his employee unless such acts are done in the course of employment. Winfield defines the phrase ‘course of employment’ in the following terms: An employee is in the course of employment if the wrongful act is: expressly or impliedly authorised by the employ

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372200504588

Tags
#law #negligence #pel #tort
Question
McNaughton is an interesting decision because in that case Neill LJ set out a list of factors to consider in determining whether a duty of care arises in respect of a negligent misstatement. These are: (6)
Answer
1. the purpose for which the statement was made;
2. the purpose for which the statement was communicated;
3. the relationship between the advisor, advisee and any third party;
4. the size of the class to which the recipient of the advice belongs;
5. the knowledge and experience of the advisee; and
6. whether the statement could be reasonably relied upon.


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
McNaughton is an interesting decision because in that case Neill LJ set out a list of factors to consider in determining whether a duty of care arises in respect of a negligent misstatement. These are: 1. the purpose for which the statement was made; 2. the purpose for which the statement was communicated; 3. the relationship between the advisor, advisee and any third party;&

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372202863884

Tags
#duty #law #negligence #tort
Question
Statutes often give powers to authorities to act but do so in a manner at their discretion. Obviously when doing so authorities have to consider a whole array of factors, including [(4)]. As an illustrative example, consider the case of Stovin v Wise [1996] AC 923 in which a driver in a road traffic accident had injured the plaintiff. The first defendant had been unable to see the plaintiff because of an over hanging bank of earth which obstructed the view. The local authority became a joint defendant in that it was claimed that they were responsible for failing to clear the highway of an obstruction they were aware of and which had previously caused accidents. The House of Lords compared the situation between a statutory power and that of a duty (see Chapter 12 - Breach of Statutory Duty) and concluded they were similar but not identical.
Answer
the allocation of resources, available facilities, public and political policy and the analysis of methodology as to achieving a particular aim


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Statutes often give powers to authorities to act but do so in a manner at their discretion. Obviously when doing so authorities have to consider a whole array of factors, including the allocation of resources, available facilities, public and political policy and the analysis of methodology as to achieving a particular aim. As an illustrative example, consider the case of Stovin v Wise [1996] AC 923 in which a driver in a road traffic accident had injured the plaintiff. The first defendant had been unable

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372204698892

Tags
#law #negligence #pel #tort
Question
In Spring v Guardian Assurance plc & Others [1994] 3 All ER 129 the defendants gave a very disparaging job reference about the plaintiff. The plaintiff was unable to gain other employment in the life assurance industry as a result of the reference and, therefore, sued the defendant for negligence. Although there was no doubt that a referee owed a duty of care to the person requesting a reference ([case]), it was questionable whether a duty of care was also owed to the subject of the reference. The Court of Appeal held that the plaintiff’s only remedy would be in defamation, not negligence. However, the House of Lords (Lord Keith dissenting) held that there could be a duty of care. Lord Goff based his reasoning on the concept of assumption of responsibility. He felt that by giving a reference, the company assumed a responsibility to the plaintiff to give a careful reference. It is very difficult to get a job without a reference and a defamation action would not always provide a satisfactory remedy.
Answer
Hedley Byrne


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
le to gain other employment in the life assurance industry as a result of the reference and, therefore, sued the defendant for negligence. Although there was no doubt that a referee owed a duty of care to the person requesting a reference (<span>Hedley Byrne), it was questionable whether a duty of care was also owed to the subject of the reference. The Court of Appeal held that the plaintiff’s only remedy would be in defamation, not negli

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372206533900

Tags
#law #negligence #pel #tort
Question
In Spring v Guardian Assurance plc & Others [1994] 3 All ER 129 the defendants gave a very disparaging job reference about the plaintiff. The plaintiff was unable to gain other employment in the life assurance industry as a result of the reference and, therefore, sued the defendant for negligence. Although there was no doubt that [...] (Hedley Byrne), it was questionable whether a duty of care was also owed to the subject of the reference. The Court of Appeal held that the plaintiff’s only remedy would be in defamation, not negligence. However, the House of Lords (Lord Keith dissenting) held that there could be a duty of care. Lord Goff based his reasoning on the concept of assumption of responsibility. He felt that by giving a reference, the company assumed a responsibility to the plaintiff to give a careful reference. It is very difficult to get a job without a reference and a defamation action would not always provide a satisfactory remedy.
Answer
a referee owed a duty of care to the person requesting a reference


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
disparaging job reference about the plaintiff. The plaintiff was unable to gain other employment in the life assurance industry as a result of the reference and, therefore, sued the defendant for negligence. Although there was no doubt that <span>a referee owed a duty of care to the person requesting a reference (Hedley Byrne), it was questionable whether a duty of care was also owed to the subject of the reference. The Court of Appeal held that the plaintiff’s only remedy would be in defamati

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372208106764

Tags
#breach #negligence #tort
Question
In short, the task being performed will determine the standard of care imposed. The usual starting point is that [...]. The classic description of the standard of care was given by Alderson B in Blyth v Birmingham Waterworks (1856) 11 Exch 781:

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 doing something which a prudent and reasonable man would not do.

Answer
the defendant must behave as a reasonable man would in all the circumstances


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
In short, the task being performed will determine the standard of care imposed. The usual starting point is that the defendant must behave as a reasonable man would in all the circumstances. The classic description of the standard of care was given by Alderson B in Blyth v Birmingham Waterworks (1856) 11 Exch 781: Negligence is the omission to do something whi

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372209679628

Tags
#breach #negligence #tort
Question
In short, the task being performed will determine the standard of care imposed. The usual starting point is that the defendant must behave as a reasonable man would in all the circumstances. The classic description of the standard of care was given by Alderson B in [case]:

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 doing something which a prudent and reasonable man would not do.

Answer
Blyth v Birmingham Waterworks (1856) 11 Exch 781


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
g performed will determine the standard of care imposed. The usual starting point is that the defendant must behave as a reasonable man would in all the circumstances. The classic description of the standard of care was given by Alderson B in <span>Blyth v Birmingham Waterworks (1856) 11 Exch 781: 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

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372211514636

Tags
#breach #negligence #tort
Question
In short, the task being performed will determine the standard of care imposed. The usual starting point is that the defendant must behave as a reasonable man would in all the circumstances. The classic description of the standard of care was given by Alderson B in Blyth v Birmingham Waterworks (1856) 11 Exch 781:

Negligence is [...].

Answer
the omission to do something which a reasonable man, guided upon those considerations which ordinarily regulate the conduct of human affairs, would do, or doing something which a prudent and reasonable man would not do


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
oint is that the defendant must behave as a reasonable man would in all the circumstances. The classic description of the standard of care was given by Alderson B in Blyth v Birmingham Waterworks (1856) 11 Exch 781: Negligence is <span>the omission to do something which a reasonable man, guided upon those considerations which ordinarily regulate the conduct of human affairs, would do, or doing something which a prudent and reasonable man would not do. <span><body><html>

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372213087500

Tags
#breach #negligence #tort
Question
A clear illustration of this is [case] in which a learner driver was judged by the standard of the ordinarily competent driver. No allowance was made for her lack of driving experience.
Answer
Nettleship v Weston [1971] 2 QB 691


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
A clear illustration of this is Nettleship v Weston [1971] 2 QB 691 in which a learner driver was judged by the standard of the ordinarily competent driver. No allowance was made for her lack of driving experience.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372214922508

Tags
#breach #negligence #tort
Question
It is important to note that the standard of care is not absolute. A person does not have to do everything possible to prevent harm; rather, they have to reach [...].
Answer
the standard of what a reasonable person would do


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
It is important to note that the standard of care is not absolute. A person does not have to do everything possible to prevent harm; rather, they have to reach the standard of what a reasonable person would do.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372215971084

Tags
#breach #negligence #tort
Question
It is important to note that the standard of care [...]. A person does not have to do everything possible to prevent harm; rather, they have to reach the standard of what a reasonable person would do.
Answer
is not absolute


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
It is important to note that the standard of care is not absolute. A person does not have to do everything possible to prevent harm; rather, they have to reach the standard of what a reasonable person would do.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372217019660

Tags
#breach #negligence #tort
Question
Etheridge v East Sussex County Council [1999] Ed CR 550
Answer
The claimant, a school teacher, was injured when a basketball, thrown by a pupil, hit her as she was climbing some stairs. Her claim against the school failed as the school had procedures and systems in place to prevent such accidents. The school was not required to give an absolute guarantee for the safety of everyone on the school’s premises.


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
In Etheridge v East Sussex County Council [1999] Ed CR 550 the claimant, a school teacher, was injured when a basketball, thrown by a pupil, hit her as she was climbing some stairs. Her claim against the school failed as the school had procedu

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372218854668

Tags
#breach #negligence #tort
Question
The claimant, a school teacher, was injured when a basketball, thrown by a pupil, hit her as she was climbing some stairs. Her claim against the school failed as the school had procedures and systems in place to prevent such accidents. The school was not required to give an absolute guarantee for the safety of everyone on the school’s premises.
Answer
Etheridge v East Sussex County Council [1999] Ed CR 550


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
In Etheridge v East Sussex County Council [1999] Ed CR 550 the claimant, a school teacher, was injured when a basketball, thrown by a pupil, hit her as she was climbing some stairs. Her claim against the school failed as the school had procedu

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372220689676

Tags
#breach #negligence #tort
Question
In Etheridge v East Sussex County Council [1999] Ed CR 550 the claimant, a school teacher, was injured when a basketball, thrown by a pupil, hit her as she was climbing some stairs. Her claim against the school failed as [...]. The school was not required to give an absolute guarantee for the safety of everyone on the school’s premises.
Answer
the school had procedures and systems in place to prevent such accidents


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
d>In Etheridge v East Sussex County Council [1999] Ed CR 550 the claimant, a school teacher, was injured when a basketball, thrown by a pupil, hit her as she was climbing some stairs. Her claim against the school failed as the school had procedures and systems in place to prevent such accidents. The school was not required to give an absolute guarantee for the safety of everyone on the school’s premises.<html>

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372228029708

Tags
#law #negligence #tort #vicarious-liability
Question
In [case] MacKenna J. laid down a three-stage test to consider when evaluating the status of the worker. The factors to be examined under this test are (1) remuneration; (2) control; and (3) whether or not the other provisions of the contract are consistent with a contract of service.
Answer
Market Investigations v Minister of Social Security [1969] 2 QB 173


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
In Market Investigations v Minister of Social Security [1969] 2 QB 173 MacKenna J. laid down a three-stage test to consider when evaluating the status of the worker. The factors to be examined under this test are (1) remuneration; (2) control; and (3) wheth

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372229864716

Tags
#law #negligence #tort #vicarious-liability
Question
In Market Investigations v Minister of Social Security [1969] 2 QB 173 MacKenna J. laid down a three-stage test to consider when evaluating the status of the worker. The factors to be examined under this test are: (3)
Answer
(1) remuneration;
(2) control; and
(3) whether or not the other provisions of the contract are consistent with a contract of service.


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
In Market Investigations v Minister of Social Security [1969] 2 QB 173 MacKenna J. laid down a three-stage test to consider when evaluating the status of the worker. The factors to be examined under this test are (1) remuneration; (2) control; and (3) whether or not the other provisions of the contract are consistent with a contract of service.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372231699724

Tags
#law #negligence #tort #vicarious-liability
Question
In Market Investigations v Minister of Social Security [1969] 2 QB 173 MacKenna J. laid down a three-stage test to consider when evaluating the status of the worker. The factors to be examined under this test are (1) remuneration; (2) control; and (3) whether or not the other provisions of the contract are consistent with a contract of service. From his statement that, ‘He who owns the assets and bears the risk is unlikely to be a servant’ it can be seen that [...]. Here, it was found that the driver was in business on his own account and that, therefore, he was an independent contractor.
Answer
the economic realities, e.g. profits, losses, etc, of the situation are paramount


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
neration; (2) control; and (3) whether or not the other provisions of the contract are consistent with a contract of service. From his statement that, ‘He who owns the assets and bears the risk is unlikely to be a servant’ it can be seen that <span>the economic realities, e.g. profits, losses, etc, of the situation are paramount. Here, it was found that the driver was in business on his own account and that, therefore, he was an independent contractor.<span><body><html>

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372233534732

Tags
#cases #duty-of-care #negligence #tort
Question
Smith and Others v Littlewoods Organisation Ltd (Chief Constable, Fife Constabulary, third party) and conjoined appeal [1987] AC 241
Answer
Facts: Littlewoods owned a disused cinema. The cinema was broken into and a fire started. The question arose as to whether Littlewoods could be liable for an omission to act and failing to prevent the fire. Lord Goff stated:

But liability should only be imposed under this principle in cases where the defender has negligently caused or permitted the creation of a source of danger on his land, and where it is foreseeable that third parties may trespass on his land and spark it off, thereby damaging the pursuer or his property. Moreover, it is not to be forgotten that, in ordinary households in this country, there are nowadays many things which might be described as possible sources of fire if interfered with by third parties, ranging from matches and firelighters to electric irons and gas cookers and even oil-fired central heating systems. These are commonplaces of modern life; and it would be quite wrong if householders were to be held liable in negligence for acting in a socially acceptable manner. No doubt the question whether liability should be imposed on defenders in a case where a source of danger on his land has been sparked off by the deliberate wrongdoing of a third party is a question to be decided on the facts of each case, and it would, I think, be wrong for your Lordships' House to anticipate the manner in which the law may develop; but I cannot help thinking that cases where liability will be so imposed are likely to be very rare.
There is another basis on which a defender may be held liable for damage to neighbouring property caused by a fire started on his (the defender's) property by the deliberate wrongdoing of a third party. This arises where he has knowledge or means of knowledge that a third party has created or is creating a risk of fire, or indeed has started a fire, on his premises, and then fails to take such steps as are reasonably open to him (in the limited sense explained by Lord Wilberforce in Goldman v Hargrave [1966] 2 All ER 989 at 995–996, [1967] 1 AC 645 at 663–664) to prevent any such fire from damaging neighbouring property. If, for example, an occupier of property has knowledge, or means of knowledge, that intruders are in the habit of trespassing on his property and starting fires there, thereby creating a risk that fire may spread to and damage neighbouring property, a duty to take reasonable steps to prevent such damage may be held to fall on him.


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Smith and Others v Littlewoods Organisation Ltd (Chief Constable, Fife Constabulary, third party) and conjoined appeal [1987] AC 241 Facts: Littlewoods owned a disused cinema. The cinema was broken into and a fire started. The question arose as to whether Littlewoods could be liable for an omission to act and failing

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372235369740

Tags
#cases #duty-of-care #negligence #tort
Question
Facts: Littlewoods owned a disused cinema. The cinema was broken into and a fire started. The question arose as to whether Littlewoods could be liable for an omission to act and failing to prevent the fire. Lord Goff stated:

But liability should only be imposed under this principle in cases where the defender has negligently caused or permitted the creation of a source of danger on his land, and where it is foreseeable that third parties may trespass on his land and spark it off, thereby damaging the pursuer or his property. Moreover, it is not to be forgotten that, in ordinary households in this country, there are nowadays many things which might be described as possible sources of fire if interfered with by third parties, ranging from matches and firelighters to electric irons and gas cookers and even oil-fired central heating systems. These are commonplaces of modern life; and it would be quite wrong if householders were to be held liable in negligence for acting in a socially acceptable manner. No doubt the question whether liability should be imposed on defenders in a case where a source of danger on his land has been sparked off by the deliberate wrongdoing of a third party is a question to be decided on the facts of each case, and it would, I think, be wrong for your Lordships' House to anticipate the manner in which the law may develop; but I cannot help thinking that cases where liability will be so imposed are likely to be very rare.
There is another basis on which a defender may be held liable for damage to neighbouring property caused by a fire started on his (the defender's) property by the deliberate wrongdoing of a third party. This arises where he has knowledge or means of knowledge that a third party has created or is creating a risk of fire, or indeed has started a fire, on his premises, and then fails to take such steps as are reasonably open to him (in the limited sense explained by Lord Wilberforce in Goldman v Hargrave [1966] 2 All ER 989 at 995–996, [1967] 1 AC 645 at 663–664) to prevent any such fire from damaging neighbouring property. If, for example, an occupier of property has knowledge, or means of knowledge, that intruders are in the habit of trespassing on his property and starting fires there, thereby creating a risk that fire may spread to and damage neighbouring property, a duty to take reasonable steps to prevent such damage may be held to fall on him.

Answer
Smith and Others v Littlewoods Organisation Ltd (Chief Constable, Fife Constabulary, third party) and conjoined appeal [1987] AC 241


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Smith and Others v Littlewoods Organisation Ltd (Chief Constable, Fife Constabulary, third party) and conjoined appeal [1987] AC 241 Facts: Littlewoods owned a disused cinema. The cinema was broken into and a fire started. The question arose as to whether Littlewoods could be liable for an omission to act and failing

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372237204748

Tags
#cases #duty-of-care #negligence #tort
Question
Smith and Others v Littlewoods Organisation Ltd (Chief Constable, Fife Constabulary, third party) and conjoined appeal [1987] AC 241
Facts: Littlewoods owned a disused cinema. The cinema was broken into and a fire started. The question arose as to whether Littlewoods could be liable for an omission to act and failing to prevent the fire. Lord Goff stated:

But liability should only be imposed under this principle in cases where [...]. Moreover, it is not to be forgotten that, in ordinary households in this country, there are nowadays many things which might be described as possible sources of fire if interfered with by third parties, ranging from matches and firelighters to electric irons and gas cookers and even oil-fired central heating systems. These are commonplaces of modern life; and it would be quite wrong if householders were to be held liable in negligence for acting in a socially acceptable manner. No doubt the question whether liability should be imposed on defenders in a case where a source of danger on his land has been sparked off by the deliberate wrongdoing of a third party is a question to be decided on the facts of each case, and it would, I think, be wrong for your Lordships' House to anticipate the manner in which the law may develop; but I cannot help thinking that cases where liability will be so imposed are likely to be very rare.
There is another basis on which a defender may be held liable for damage to neighbouring property caused by a fire started on his (the defender's) property by the deliberate wrongdoing of a third party. This arises where he has knowledge or means of knowledge that a third party has created or is creating a risk of fire, or indeed has started a fire, on his premises, and then fails to take such steps as are reasonably open to him (in the limited sense explained by Lord Wilberforce in Goldman v Hargrave [1966] 2 All ER 989 at 995–996, [1967] 1 AC 645 at 663–664) to prevent any such fire from damaging neighbouring property. If, for example, an occupier of property has knowledge, or means of knowledge, that intruders are in the habit of trespassing on his property and starting fires there, thereby creating a risk that fire may spread to and damage neighbouring property, a duty to take reasonable steps to prevent such damage may be held to fall on him.

Answer
the defender has negligently caused or permitted the creation of a source of danger on his land, and where it is foreseeable that third parties may trespass on his land and spark it off, thereby damaging the pursuer or his property


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
and a fire started. The question arose as to whether Littlewoods could be liable for an omission to act and failing to prevent the fire. Lord Goff stated: But liability should only be imposed under this principle in cases where <span>the defender has negligently caused or permitted the creation of a source of danger on his land, and where it is foreseeable that third parties may trespass on his land and spark it off, thereby damaging the pursuer or his property. Moreover, it is not to be forgotten that, in ordinary households in this country, there are nowadays many things which might be described as possible sources of fire if interfered with

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372238253324

Tags
#cases #duty-of-care #negligence #tort
Question
Smith and Others v Littlewoods Organisation Ltd (Chief Constable, Fife Constabulary, third party) and conjoined appeal [1987] AC 241
Facts: Littlewoods owned a disused cinema. The cinema was broken into and a fire started. The question arose as to whether Littlewoods could be liable for an omission to act and failing to prevent the fire. Lord Goff stated:

But liability should only be imposed under this principle in cases where the defender has negligently caused or permitted the creation of a source of danger on his land, and where it is foreseeable that third parties may trespass on his land and spark it off, thereby damaging the pursuer or his property. Moreover, it is not to be forgotten that, in ordinary households in this country, there are nowadays many things which might be described as possible sources of fire if interfered with by third parties, ranging from matches and firelighters to electric irons and gas cookers and even oil-fired central heating systems. These are commonplaces of modern life; and it would be quite wrong if householders were to be held liable in negligence for acting in a socially acceptable manner. No doubt the question whether liability should be imposed on defenders in a case where a source of danger on his land has been sparked off by the deliberate wrongdoing of a third party is a question to be decided on the facts of each case, and it would, I think, be wrong for your Lordships' House to anticipate the manner in which the law may develop; but I cannot help thinking that cases where liability will be so imposed are likely to be very rare.
There is another basis on which a defender may be held liable for damage to neighbouring property caused by a fire started on his (the defender's) property by the deliberate wrongdoing of a third party. This arises where [...]. If, for example, an occupier of property has knowledge, or means of knowledge, that intruders are in the habit of trespassing on his property and starting fires there, thereby creating a risk that fire may spread to and damage neighbouring property, a duty to take reasonable steps to prevent such damage may be held to fall on him.

Answer
he has knowledge or means of knowledge that a third party has created or is creating a risk of fire, or indeed has started a fire, on his premises, and then fails to take such steps as are reasonably open to him (in the limited sense explained by Lord Wilberforce in Goldman v Hargrave [1966] 2 All ER 989 at 995–996, [1967] 1 AC 645 at 663–664) to prevent any such fire from damaging neighbouring property


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
o be very rare. There is another basis on which a defender may be held liable for damage to neighbouring property caused by a fire started on his (the defender's) property by the deliberate wrongdoing of a third party. This arises where <span>he has knowledge or means of knowledge that a third party has created or is creating a risk of fire, or indeed has started a fire, on his premises, and then fails to take such steps as are reasonably open to him (in the limited sense explained by Lord Wilberforce in Goldman v Hargrave [1966] 2 All ER 989 at 995–996, [1967] 1 AC 645 at 663–664) to prevent any such fire from damaging neighbouring property. If, for example, an occupier of property has knowledge, or means of knowledge, that intruders are in the habit of trespassing on his property and starting fires there, thereby creating

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372239826188

Tags
#duty #law #negligence #tort
Question
Negligence requires proof of a number of elements before a claim is successful. These are: (6)
Answer
1. Loss or damage of a recognised kind sustained by the claimant
2. The existence of a duty of care owed by the defendant to the claimant; and,
3. Breach of that duty by the defendant;
4. Proof that the breach caused the damage;
5. Proof that the damage suffered was reasonably foreseeable. i.e. not too remote
6. Finally, defences: Does the defendant have one or more valid defences to the cliam?


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Negligence requires proof of a number of elements before a claim is successful. These are: 1. Loss or damage of a recognised kind sustained by the claimant 2. The existence of a duty of care owed by the defendant to the claimant; and, 3. Breach of that duty by the de

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372241661196

Tags
#duty #law #negligence #tort
Question
In [case], a seven member House of Lords finally overruled the decision in Anns. During the case, reference was also made to Sutherland. The courts were instructed to impose a duty of care if they could find a suitable factual precedent to base it on. Effectively this means that, even though new duties of care could be recognised, the courts will only do so on a pragmatic and incremental basis. Policy was not to be ignored and would still play a role in consideration of the third question.
Answer
Murphy v Brentwood


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
In Murphy v Brentwood, a seven member House of Lords finally overruled the decision in Anns. During the case, reference was also made to Sutherland. The courts were instructed to impose a duty of care if t

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372243496204

Tags
#duty #law #negligence #tort
Question
In Murphy v Brentwood, a seven member House of Lords finally overruled the decision in Anns. During the case, reference was also made to Sutherland. The courts were instructed to impose a duty of care if [...]. Effectively this means that, even though new duties of care could be recognised, the courts will only do so on a pragmatic and incremental basis. Policy was not to be ignored and would still play a role in consideration of the third question.
Answer
they could find a suitable factual precedent to base it on


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
html>In Murphy v Brentwood, a seven member House of Lords finally overruled the decision in Anns. During the case, reference was also made to Sutherland. The courts were instructed to impose a duty of care if they could find a suitable factual precedent to base it on. Effectively this means that, even though new duties of care could be recognised, the courts will only do so on a pragmatic and incremental basis. Policy was not to be ignored and wou

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372244544780

Tags
#duty #law #negligence #tort
Question
An example as to how the courts utilise the Caparo test can be seen in the decision of [case]. Here a boxer’s claim that immediate medical attention should have been available at the ringside was upheld. The injury was foreseeable, the boxing licensing system meant there was close proximity and it was fair, just and reasonable to impose a duty
Answer
Watson v British Boxing Board of Control [2001] QB 1134


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
An example as to how the courts utilise the test can be seen in the decision of Watson v British Boxing Board of Control [2001] QB 1134. Here a boxer’s claim that immediate medical attention should have been available at the ringside was upheld. The injury was foreseeable, the boxing licensing system meant there was c

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372247952652

Tags
#duty #law #negligence #tort
Question
An example as to how the courts utilise the Caparo test can be seen in the decision of Watson v British Boxing Board of Control [2001] QB 1134. Here a boxer’s claim that [...]. The injury was foreseeable, the boxing licensing system meant there was close proximity and it was fair, just and reasonable to impose a duty
Answer
immediate medical attention should have been available at the ringside was upheld


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
An example as to how the courts utilise the Caparo test can be seen in the decision of Watson v British Boxing Board of Control [2001] QB 1134. Here a boxer’s claim that immediate medical attention should have been available at the ringside was upheld. The injury was foreseeable, the boxing licensing system meant there was close proximity and it was fair, just and reasonable to impose a duty

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372249525516

Tags
#duty #law #negligence #tort
Question
An example as to how the courts utilise the Caparo test can be seen in the decision of Watson v British Boxing Board of Control [2001] QB 1134. Here a boxer’s claim that immediate medical attention should have been available at the ringside was upheld. [ why (3) ]
Answer
The injury was foreseeable, the boxing licensing system meant there was close proximity and it was fair, just and reasonable to impose a duty


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
as to how the courts utilise the Caparo test can be seen in the decision of Watson v British Boxing Board of Control [2001] QB 1134. Here a boxer’s claim that immediate medical attention should have been available at the ringside was upheld. <span>The injury was foreseeable, the boxing licensing system meant there was close proximity and it was fair, just and reasonable to impose a duty<span><body><html>

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372252409100

Tags
#duty #law #negligence #tort
Question
In [ case ], the House of Lords considered a number of appeals in which it was alleged solicitors had been negligent in reaching settlements subsequently approved by the courts. None of the cases involved solicitors acting in the capacity of advocates. Although it was not strictly necessary for the House of Lords to question advocate immunity they nevertheless ruled unanimously that such immunity could no longer stand in civil cases and (by a majority) in criminal cases.
Answer
Hall (Arthur J.S.) & Co. v Simons [2000] 3 WLR 543, 3 All ER 673


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
In Hall (Arthur J.S.) & Co. v Simons [2000] 3 WLR 543, 3 All ER 673, the House of Lords considered a number of appeals in which it was alleged solicitors had been negligent in reaching settlements subsequently approved by the courts. None of the cases i

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372254244108

Tags
#duty #law #negligence #tort
Question
In Hall (Arthur J.S.) & Co. v Simons [2000] 3 WLR 543, 3 All ER 673, the House of Lords considered a number of appeals in which it was alleged solicitors had been negligent in reaching settlements subsequently approved by the courts. None of the cases involved solicitors acting in the capacity of advocates. Although it was not strictly necessary for the House of Lords to question advocate immunity they nevertheless ruled unanimously that [...].
Answer
advocate immunity could no longer stand in civil cases and (by a majority) in criminal cases


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
bsequently approved by the courts. None of the cases involved solicitors acting in the capacity of advocates. Although it was not strictly necessary for the House of Lords to question advocate immunity they nevertheless ruled unanimously that <span>such immunity could no longer stand in civil cases and (by a majority) in criminal cases.<span><body><html>

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372258700556

Tags
#duty #law #negligence #tort
Question
Where the accused still stands convicted of the offence, any attempt to challenge the competence of the advocate will generally fail
Answer
Hunter v Chief Constable of the West Midlands Police [1982] AC 529


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Where the accused still stands convicted of the offence, any attempt to challenge the competence of the advocate will generally fail (see Hunter v Chief Constable of the West Midlands Police [1982] AC 529).

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372261584140

Tags
#duty #law #negligence #tort
Question
There are also special provisions in relation to the police. In such cases the courts make a distinction between operational and policy matters. The police can be held liable (with some exceptions) for the former, but not the latter. This distinction is clearly evidenced in [ case ].
Answer
Rigby v Chief Constable of Northamptonshire [1985] 2 All ER 985


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
s in relation to the police. In such cases the courts make a distinction between operational and policy matters. The police can be held liable (with some exceptions) for the former, but not the latter. This distinction is clearly evidenced in <span>Rigby v Chief Constable of Northamptonshire [1985] 2 All ER 985.<span><body><html>

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372265254156

Tags
#duty #law #negligence #tort
Question
Rigby v Chief Constable of Northamptonshire [1985] 2 All ER 985
Answer
Here the police had negligently fired a canister of CS gas into the plaintiff’s shop, which was under siege, without taking adequate precautions against the high risk of fire. When a fire occurred, the plaintiff was successful in his claim against the police, as this was a negligent operational act.


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
In Rigby v Chief Constable of Northamptonshire [1985] 2 All ER 985. Here the police had negligently fired a canister of CS gas into the plaintiff’s shop, which was under siege, without taking adequate precautions against the high risk of fire. When a f

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372267089164

Tags
#duty #law #negligence #tort
Question
Here the police had negligently fired a canister of CS gas into the plaintiff’s shop, which was under siege, without taking adequate precautions against the high risk of fire. When a fire occurred, the plaintiff was successful in his claim against the police, as this was a negligent operational act.
Answer
Rigby v Chief Constable of Northamptonshire [1985] 2 All ER 985


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
In Rigby v Chief Constable of Northamptonshire [1985] 2 All ER 985. Here the police had negligently fired a canister of CS gas into the plaintiff’s shop, which was under siege, without taking adequate precautions against the high risk of fire. When a f

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372268924172

Tags
#duty #law #negligence #tort
Question
In Rigby v Chief Constable of Northamptonshire [1985] 2 All ER 985. Here the police had negligently fired a canister of CS gas into the plaintiff’s shop, which was under siege, without taking adequate precautions against the high risk of fire. When a fire occurred, the plaintiff was successful in his claim against the police, as [...].
Answer
this was a negligent operational act


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
negligently fired a canister of CS gas into the plaintiff’s shop, which was under siege, without taking adequate precautions against the high risk of fire. When a fire occurred, the plaintiff was successful in his claim against the police, as <span>this was a negligent operational act.<span><body><html>

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372269972748

Tags
#duty #law #negligence #tort
Question
Leach v Chief Constable of Gloucester [1999] 1 All ER 215
Answer
Here the plaintiff had been a lay witness to a police interview; a requirement under the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984. She had sat in on several interviews with Frederick West (a suspect accused of a series of murders). As a result of this she had suffered Post-traumatic Stress Syndrome. In her claim, she stated that the police had owed her a duty of care to inform her of the disturbing nature of the case. The Court of Appeal dismissed her claim. The sort of person who could act as a lay witness was very wide and it would impose too onerous a burden on the police force to psychologically test every person who could potentially hold such a position.


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Leach v Chief Constable of Gloucester [1999] 1 All ER 215 also considered policy issues. Here the plaintiff had been a lay witness to a police interview; a requirement under the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984. She had sat in on several

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372271807756

Tags
#duty #law #negligence #tort
Question
Here the plaintiff had been a lay witness to a police interview; a requirement under the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984. She had sat in on several interviews with Frederick West (a suspect accused of a series of murders). As a result of this she had suffered Post-traumatic Stress Syndrome. In her claim, she stated that the police had owed her a duty of care to inform her of the disturbing nature of the case. The Court of Appeal dismissed her claim. The sort of person who could act as a lay witness was very wide and it would impose too onerous a burden on the police force to psychologically test every person who could potentially hold such a position.
Answer
Leach v Chief Constable of Gloucester [1999] 1 All ER 215


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Leach v Chief Constable of Gloucester [1999] 1 All ER 215 also considered policy issues. Here the plaintiff had been a lay witness to a police interview; a requirement under the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984. She had sat in on several

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372273642764

Tags
#duty #law #negligence #tort
Question
Leach v Chief Constable of Gloucester [1999] 1 All ER 215 also considered policy issues. Here the plaintiff had been a lay witness to a police interview; a requirement under the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984. She had sat in on several interviews with Frederick West (a suspect accused of a series of murders). As a result of this she had suffered Post-traumatic Stress Syndrome. In her claim, she stated that the police had owed her a duty of care to inform her of the disturbing nature of the case. The Court of Appeal dismissed her claim. [ reasoning ].
Answer
The sort of person who could act as a lay witness was very wide and it would impose too onerous a burden on the police force to psychologically test every person who could potentially hold such a position


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
murders). As a result of this she had suffered Post-traumatic Stress Syndrome. In her claim, she stated that the police had owed her a duty of care to inform her of the disturbing nature of the case. The Court of Appeal dismissed her claim. <span>The sort of person who could act as a lay witness was very wide and it would impose too onerous a burden on the police force to psychologically test every person who could potentially hold such a position. <span><body><html>

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372275477772

Tags
#duty #law #negligence #tort
Question
By contrast, the Article 2 ECHR claim in [ case ] was not struck out but returned for trial where the victim was stabbed by her former husband having called the police who failed to categorise her call appropriately.
Answer
Michael v Chief Constable of South Wales [2012] EWCA Civ 981


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
By contrast, the Article 2 ECHR claim in Michael v Chief Constable of South Wales [2012] EWCA Civ 981 was not struck out but returned for trial where the victim was stabbed by her former husband having called the police who failed to categorise her call appropriately.</bo

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372277312780

Tags
#duty #law #negligence #tort
Question
By contrast, the Article 2 ECHR claim in Michael v Chief Constable of South Wales [2012] EWCA Civ 981 was not struck out but returned for trial where [...].
Answer
the victim was stabbed by her former husband having called the police who failed to categorise her call appropriately


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
By contrast, the Article 2 ECHR claim in Michael v Chief Constable of South Wales [2012] EWCA Civ 981 was not struck out but returned for trial where the victim was stabbed by her former husband having called the police who failed to categorise her call appropriately.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372278361356

Tags
#duty #law #negligence #tort
Question
In Capital and Counties v Hampshire County Council the alleged negligence consisted of a fire-fighter ordering that a sprinkler system, operating at the fire, should be turned off. In John Munroe it was alleged that the fire brigade left the scene before ensuring the fire was properly extinguished and in Church of Jesus Christ, the fire service failed to ensure that an adequate supply of water was available at the scene of the fire. It was held in all of these cases that the fire brigade’s attendance at the scene of a fire [...]. Here the court simply followed the reasoning in Alexandrou (see 3.4.2 above) i.e. no duty to respond to an emergency.
Answer
did not, in itself, give rise to the requisite degree of proximity and it, therefore, followed that the fire brigade was under no duty to attend to the fires in the first place


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
tinguished and in Church of Jesus Christ, the fire service failed to ensure that an adequate supply of water was available at the scene of the fire. It was held in all of these cases that the fire brigade’s attendance at the scene of a fire <span>did not, in itself, give rise to the requisite degree of proximity and it, therefore, followed that the fire brigade was under no duty to attend to the fires in the first place. Here the court simply followed the reasoning in Alexandrou (see 3.4.2 above) i.e. no duty to respond to an emergency.<span><body><html>

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372279409932

Tags
#duty #law #negligence #tort
Question
Haynes v Harwood [1935] 1 KB 146
Answer
The defendant left a horse unattended and untethered in a busy street. When the horse bolted, a policeman was injured in the act of bringing the horse to a halt, which he did to prevent injury occurring to other users of the street. He was able to recover damages, as the necessity of his act in affecting a ‘rescue’ was a foreseeable result of the defendant’s negligence.


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
In Haynes v Harwood [1935] 1 KB 146 the defendant left a horse unattended and untethered in a busy street. When the horse bolted, a policeman was injured in the act of bringing the horse to a halt, which he did to preven

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372281244940

Tags
#duty #law #negligence #tort
Question
The defendant left a horse unattended and untethered in a busy street. When the horse bolted, a policeman was injured in the act of bringing the horse to a halt, which he did to prevent injury occurring to other users of the street. He was able to recover damages, as the necessity of his act in affecting a ‘rescue’ was a foreseeable result of the defendant’s negligence.
Answer
Haynes v Harwood [1935] 1 KB 146


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
In Haynes v Harwood [1935] 1 KB 146 the defendant left a horse unattended and untethered in a busy street. When the horse bolted, a policeman was injured in the act of bringing the horse to a halt, which he did to preven

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372283079948

Tags
#duty #law #negligence #tort
Question
In Haynes v Harwood [1935] 1 KB 146 the defendant left a horse unattended and untethered in a busy street. When the horse bolted, a policeman was injured in the act of bringing the horse to a halt, which he did to prevent injury occurring to other users of the street. He was able to recover damages, as [...].
Answer
the necessity of his act in affecting a ‘rescue’ was a foreseeable result of the defendant’s negligence


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
nattended and untethered in a busy street. When the horse bolted, a policeman was injured in the act of bringing the horse to a halt, which he did to prevent injury occurring to other users of the street. He was able to recover damages, as <span>the necessity of his act in affecting a ‘rescue’ was a foreseeable result of the defendant’s negligence.<span><body><html>

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372284128524

Tags
#duty #law #negligence #tort
Question
Cutler v United Dairies Ltd [1933] 2 KB 297
Answer
The plaintiff was injured trying to recapture a horse which had bolted and had come to a rest in a field. As there was no risk to either person or property he was not acting in an emergency and, therefore, he could not be regarded as a rescuer. As such, the claim failed.


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Cutler v United Dairies Ltd [1933] 2 KB 297 where the plaintiff was injured trying to recapture a horse which had bolted and had come to a rest in a field. As there was no risk to either person or property he was not acting in a

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372285963532

Tags
#duty #law #negligence #tort
Question
The plaintiff was injured trying to recapture a horse which had bolted and had come to a rest in a field. As there was no risk to either person or property he was not acting in an emergency and, therefore, he could not be regarded as a rescuer. As such, the claim failed.
Answer
Cutler v United Dairies Ltd [1933] 2 KB 297


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Cutler v United Dairies Ltd [1933] 2 KB 297 where the plaintiff was injured trying to recapture a horse which had bolted and had come to a rest in a field. As there was no risk to either person or property he was not acting in a

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372287798540

Tags
#duty #law #negligence #tort
Question
Cutler v United Dairies Ltd [1933] 2 KB 297 where the plaintiff was injured trying to recapture a horse which had bolted and had come to a rest in a field. As [...]. As such, the claim failed.
Answer
there was no risk to either person or property he was not acting in an emergency and, therefore, he could not be regarded as a rescuer


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Cutler v United Dairies Ltd [1933] 2 KB 297 where the plaintiff was injured trying to recapture a horse which had bolted and had come to a rest in a field. As there was no risk to either person or property he was not acting in an emergency and, therefore, he could not be regarded as a rescuer. As such, the claim failed.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372289371404

Tags
#duty #law #negligence #tort
Question
Baker v T.E. Hopkins & Son Ltd [1959] 3 All ER 225
Answer
A doctor was held to be a rescuer when trying to save some workman trapped down a mine.


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Baker v T.E. Hopkins & Son Ltd [1959] 3 All ER 225 in which a doctor was held to be a rescuer when trying to save some workman trapped down a mine.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372291206412

Tags
#duty #law #negligence #tort
Question
A doctor was held to be a rescuer when trying to save some workman trapped down a mine.
Answer
Baker v T.E. Hopkins & Son Ltd [1959] 3 All ER 225


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Baker v T.E. Hopkins & Son Ltd [1959] 3 All ER 225 in which a doctor was held to be a rescuer when trying to save some workman trapped down a mine.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372293041420

Tags
#duty #law #negligence #tort
Question
Costello v Chief Constable of Northumbria Police [1999] 1 All ER 550
Answer
The employer police force owed a duty of care to one of their officers, the claimant, who was attacked by a prisoner whilst a fellow officer failed to assist


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
In Costello v Chief Constable of Northumbria Police [1999] 1 All ER 550 the employer police force owed a duty of care to one of their officers, the claimant, who was attacked by a prisoner whilst a fellow officer failed to assist (see under 3.4.2 above).</

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372294876428

Tags
#duty #law #negligence #tort
Question
The employer police force owed a duty of care to one of their officers, the claimant, who was attacked by a prisoner whilst a fellow officer failed to assist
Answer
Costello v Chief Constable of Northumbria Police [1999] 1 All ER 550


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
In Costello v Chief Constable of Northumbria Police [1999] 1 All ER 550 the employer police force owed a duty of care to one of their officers, the claimant, who was attacked by a prisoner whilst a fellow officer failed to assist (see under 3.4.2 above).</

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372296711436

Tags
#duty #law #negligence #tort
Question
If a defendant actually creates a dangerous situation (even though it was no fault of his own) the law may [...]. Again we have seen a clear example of this in Capital and Counties plc v Hampshire County Council [1997] QB 1004 (see above under Emergency Services), in which a fire brigade were held to have no general duty of care to property owners unless they acted in such a manner as to actually aggravate the situation (in this case, by turning off the sprinkler system).
Answer
still impose a positive duty to act in order to mitigate the danger


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
If a defendant actually creates a dangerous situation (even though it was no fault of his own) the law may still impose a positive duty to act in order to mitigate the danger. Again we have seen a clear example of this in Capital and Counties plc v Hampshire County Council [1997] QB 1004 (see above under Emergency Services), in which a fire brigade were he

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372298284300

Tags
#duty #law #negligence #tort
Question
If a defendant [...] the law may still impose a positive duty to act in order to mitigate the danger. Again we have seen a clear example of this in Capital and Counties plc v Hampshire County Council [1997] QB 1004 (see above under Emergency Services), in which a fire brigade were held to have no general duty of care to property owners unless they acted in such a manner as to actually aggravate the situation (in this case, by turning off the sprinkler system).
Answer
actually creates a dangerous situation (even though it was no fault of his own)


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
If a defendant actually creates a dangerous situation (even though it was no fault of his own) the law may still impose a positive duty to act in order to mitigate the danger. Again we have seen a clear example of this in Capital and Counties plc v Hampshire County Council [1997]

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372299857164

Tags
#duty #law #negligence #tort
Question
If a defendant actually creates a dangerous situation (even though it was no fault of his own) the law may still impose a positive duty to act in order to mitigate the danger. Again we have seen a clear example of this in [ case ] (see above under Emergency Services), in which a fire brigade were held to have no general duty of care to property owners unless they acted in such a manner as to actually aggravate the situation (in this case, by turning off the sprinkler system).
Answer
Capital and Counties plc v Hampshire County Council [1997] QB 1004


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
>If a defendant actually creates a dangerous situation (even though it was no fault of his own) the law may still impose a positive duty to act in order to mitigate the danger. Again we have seen a clear example of this in Capital and Counties plc v Hampshire County Council [1997] QB 1004 (see above under Emergency Services), in which a fire brigade were held to have no general duty of care to property owners unless they acted in such a manner as to actually aggravate t

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372302478604

Tags
#duty #law #negligence #tort
Question
A duty of care may also arise in the relationship between nightclub management and their guests as in [case]
Answer
Everett v Comojo [2011] EWCA Civ 13.


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
A duty of care may also arise in the relationship between nightclub management and their guests as in Everett v Comojo [2011] EWCA Civ 13.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372304313612

Tags
#duty #law #negligence #tort
Question
A duty of care may also arise in the relationship between [...] as in Everett v Comojo [2011] EWCA Civ 13.
Answer
nightclub management and their guests


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
A duty of care may also arise in the relationship between nightclub management and their guests as in Everett v Comojo [2011] EWCA Civ 13.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372305362188

Tags
#duty #law #negligence #tort
Question
If a defendant, by their negligence, [...], they may be liable even though it was a third party’s action that actually caused the damage in question.
Answer
creates or allows the creation of a danger and the claimant is injured as a result


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
If a defendant, by their negligence, creates or allows the creation of a danger and the claimant is injured as a result, they may be liable even though it was a third party’s action that actually caused the damage in question.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372306410764

Tags
#duty #law #negligence #tort
Question
If a defendant, by their negligence, creates or allows the creation of a danger and the claimant is injured as a result, they [...].
Answer
may be liable even though it was a third party’s action that actually caused the damage in question


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
If a defendant, by their negligence, creates or allows the creation of a danger and the claimant is injured as a result, they may be liable even though it was a third party’s action that actually caused the damage in question.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372307459340

Tags
#duty #law #negligence #tort
Question
If a defendant [...], they may owe a duty to anyone who is subsequently damaged as a result of the said danger. In other words, the defendant has a duty of care to take reasonable steps to eradicate or diminish the danger.
Answer
knows, or ought to know, of a danger on their property created by a third party


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
If a defendant knows, or ought to know, of a danger on their property created by a third party, they may owe a duty to anyone who is subsequently damaged as a result of the said danger. In other words, the defendant has a duty of care to take reasonable steps to eradicate or di

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372308507916

Tags
#duty #law #negligence #tort
Question
If a defendant knows, or ought to know, of a danger on their property created by a third party, they may owe a duty to [...]. In other words, the defendant has a duty of care to take reasonable steps to eradicate or diminish the danger.
Answer
anyone who is subsequently damaged as a result of the said danger


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
If a defendant knows, or ought to know, of a danger on their property created by a third party, they may owe a duty to anyone who is subsequently damaged as a result of the said danger. In other words, the defendant has a duty of care to take reasonable steps to eradicate or diminish the danger.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372309556492

Tags
#law #negligence #pel #tort
Question
A good example of pure economic loss of this type arose in Spartan Steel (at 5.3). As a result of the electricity being cut off, the factory was not able to operate for some time. In addition to the loss suffered in respect of the metal damaged at the time, the plaintiffs also tried to claim that during the period of shutdown they could have made further profit from processing four further ‘melts’. This loss was held to be irrecoverable. It was purely financial loss which did not result from any damage to the plaintiff’s property. Lord Denning pointed out that [...]. Therefore, for policy reasons, the action failed on this head of the claim.
Answer
the plaintiff could have worked harder once the power was restored or that they could have had their own generator or insurance to cover such occurrences


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
n they could have made further profit from processing four further ‘melts’. This loss was held to be irrecoverable. It was purely financial loss which did not result from any damage to the plaintiff’s property. Lord Denning pointed out that <span>the plaintiff could have worked harder once the power was restored or that they could have had their own generator or insurance to cover such occurrences. Therefore, for policy reasons, the action failed on this head of the claim. <span><body><html>

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372311129356

Tags
#law #negligence #pel #tort
Question
A good example of pure economic loss of this type arose in [ case ] (at 5.3). As a result of the electricity being cut off, the factory was not able to operate for some time. In addition to the loss suffered in respect of the metal damaged at the time, the plaintiffs also tried to claim that during the period of shutdown they could have made further profit from processing four further ‘melts’. This loss was held to be irrecoverable. It was purely financial loss which did not result from any damage to the plaintiff’s property. Lord Denning pointed out that the plaintiff could have worked harder once the power was restored or that they could have had their own generator or insurance to cover such occurrences. Therefore, for policy reasons, the action failed on this head of the claim.
Answer
Spartan Steel


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
A good example of pure economic loss of this type arose in Spartan Steel (at 5.3). As a result of the electricity being cut off, the factory was not able to operate for some time. In addition to the loss suffered in respect of the metal damaged at the time,

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372312964364

Tags
#law #negligence #pel #tort
Question
if a claimant suffers losses as a result of damage to property in which [...], then the loss will again be categorised as pure economic loss.
Answer
they have no proprietary interest


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
if a claimant suffers losses as a result of damage to property in which they have no proprietary interest, then the loss will again be categorised as pure economic loss.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372314012940

Tags
#law #negligence #pel #tort
Question
if a claimant suffers losses as a result of damage to property in which they have no proprietary interest, then [...].
Answer
the loss will again be categorised as pure economic loss


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
if a claimant suffers losses as a result of damage to property in which they have no proprietary interest, then the loss will again be categorised as pure economic loss.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372315585804

Tags
#law #negligence #pel #tort
Question
While it is possible to bring a claim where property has been damaged by the negligent act of another, it is not possible to claim for [...]. Such loss has been categorised as pure economic loss.
Answer
the cost of repairing an inherently defective item


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
While it is possible to bring a claim where property has been damaged by the negligent act of another, it is not possible to claim for the cost of repairing an inherently defective item. Such loss has been categorised as pure economic loss.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372316634380

Tags
#law #negligence #pel #tort
Question
While it is possible to bring a claim where property has been damaged by the negligent act of another, it is not possible to claim for the cost of repairing an inherently defective item. Such loss has been categorised as [...].
Answer
pure economic loss


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
d>While it is possible to bring a claim where property has been damaged by the negligent act of another, it is not possible to claim for the cost of repairing an inherently defective item. Such loss has been categorised as pure economic loss.<html>

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372317682956

Tags
#law #negligence #pel #tort
Question
Junior Books v Veitchi Co Ltd [1983] AC 520
Answer
The plaintiffs in this case had had a factory constructed by a building firm. The plaintiffs had made it clear that because of the kind of machinery they were going to be using, they required special flooring and they recommended suitable flooring contractors. The floor was laid by these contractors but was found to be defective. The plaintiffs bought an action against the flooring sub-contractors for the defect in the flooring and subsequent delay in initiating production. This was despite there being no threat to health and safety, nor any risk to the actual fabric of the building. The House of Lords allowed the claim. There was a duty of care because there had been ‘assumed responsibility’ and ‘reasonable reliance’ between the parties. As Lord Roskill stated the relationship between the parties was ‘almost as close a commercial relationship… as it is possible to envisage short of privity of contract’.


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
The ‘high water mark’ is generally considered to be the House of Lords decision in Junior Books v Veitchi Co Ltd [1983] AC 520 (Horsey and Rackley). The plaintiffs in this case had had a factory constructed by a building firm. The plaintiffs had made it clear that because of the kind of machinery they were goi

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372319517964

Tags
#law #negligence #pel #tort
Question
The plaintiffs in this case had had a factory constructed by a building firm. The plaintiffs had made it clear that because of the kind of machinery they were going to be using, they required special flooring and they recommended suitable flooring contractors. The floor was laid by these contractors but was found to be defective. The plaintiffs bought an action against the flooring sub-contractors for the defect in the flooring and subsequent delay in initiating production. This was despite there being no threat to health and safety, nor any risk to the actual fabric of the building. The House of Lords allowed the claim. There was a duty of care because there had been ‘assumed responsibility’ and ‘reasonable reliance’ between the parties. As Lord Roskill stated the relationship between the parties was ‘almost as close a commercial relationship… as it is possible to envisage short of privity of contract’.
Answer
Junior Books v Veitchi Co Ltd [1983] AC 520


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
The ‘high water mark’ is generally considered to be the House of Lords decision in Junior Books v Veitchi Co Ltd [1983] AC 520 (Horsey and Rackley). The plaintiffs in this case had had a factory constructed by a building firm. The plaintiffs had made it clear that because of the kind of machinery they were goi

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372321352972

Tags
#law #negligence #pel #tort
Question
Hedley Byrne v Heller [1964] AC 465: Recovery for negligent misstatement is only possible if [...]. If these tests are satisfied then all the losses flowing from the misstatement are recoverable, including any pure economic loss that has been incurred. This case is of increasing importance, given the recent tendency of the courts to restrict the ambit of the other exceptions.
Answer
there is found to be a special relationship between the parties and reasonable reliance by the claimant upon the defendant’s words


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Recovery for negligent misstatement is only possible if there is found to be a special relationship between the parties and reasonable reliance by the claimant upon the defendant’s words. If these tests are satisfied then all the losses flowing from the misstatement are recoverable, including any pure economic loss that has been incurred. This case is of increasing impo

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372322401548

Tags
#law #negligence #pel #tort
Question
Hedley Byrne v Heller [1964] AC 465: Recovery for negligent misstatement is only possible if there is found to be a special relationship between the parties and reasonable reliance by the claimant upon the defendant’s words. If these tests are satisfied then [...]. This case is of increasing importance, given the recent tendency of the courts to restrict the ambit of the other exceptions.
Answer
all the losses flowing from the misstatement are recoverable, including any pure economic loss that has been incurred


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
ad>Recovery for negligent misstatement is only possible if there is found to be a special relationship between the parties and reasonable reliance by the claimant upon the defendant’s words. If these tests are satisfied then all the losses flowing from the misstatement are recoverable, including any pure economic loss that has been incurred. This case is of increasing importance, given the recent tendency of the courts to restrict the ambit of the other exceptions.<html>

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372325022988

Tags
#law #negligence #pel #tort
Question
Recovery for negligent misstatement is only possible if there is found to be a special relationship between the parties and reasonable reliance by the claimant upon the defendant’s words. If these tests are satisfied then all the losses flowing from the misstatement are recoverable, including any pure economic loss that has been incurred.
Answer
Hedley Byrne v Heller [1964] AC 465


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Recovery for negligent misstatement is only possible if there is found to be a special relationship between the parties and reasonable reliance by the claimant upon the defendant’s words. If these tests are satisfied then all the losses flowing from the misstatement are recoverable, including any pure economic loss that has been incurred. This case is of increasing importance, given the recent tendency of the courts to restrict the ambit of the other exceptions.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372326857996

Tags
#law #negligence #pel #tort
Question
[case] Where a breach of fiduciary duty by a solicitor gave rise to foreseeable pure economic loss. Such cases often involve solicitors negligently drafting wills. See also White v Jones [1995] 1 All ER 691.
Answer
Ross v Caunters [1980] Ch 297


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Ross v Caunters [1980] Ch 297 Where a breach of fiduciary duty by a solicitor gave rise to foreseeable pure economic loss. Such cases often involve solicitors negligently drafting wills. See also White v Jones [1995

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372328693004

Tags
#law #negligence #pel #tort
Question
Ross v Caunters [1980] Ch 297 Where a breach of fiduciary duty by a solicitor gave rise to [...]. Such cases often involve solicitors negligently drafting wills. See also White v Jones [1995] 1 All ER 691.
Answer
foreseeable pure economic loss


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Ross v Caunters [1980] Ch 297 Where a breach of fiduciary duty by a solicitor gave rise to foreseeable pure economic loss. Such cases often involve solicitors negligently drafting wills. See also White v Jones [1995] 1 All ER 691.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372329741580

Tags
#law #negligence #pel #tort
Question
[ case ] raised two other possible situations where pure economic loss might be recovered, though these are obiter comments.

1. Adjoining Occupiers – if the latent defect in the claimant’s property is posing a threat to a neighbour’s land or property, then the costs of repairs may be recoverable. Such actions are usually in nuisance rather then negligence.

2. Complex Structure Theory – where a sub-contractor has installed a defective part of the premises that has caused damage to the rest of the building, Lord Bridge suggested that the other part of the building affected could be regarded as ‘other property’ and, therefore, recovery would be possible on the basis of normal principles of physical damage and economic loss consequent upon physical damage. The theory itself originated in D & F Estates Ltd (see 5.4.3). The possible application of this theory was discussed in Jacobs v Moreton (1996) 72 BLR 92, Current Law, February 1996 180.
Answer
Murphy v Brentwood


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Murphy v Brentwood raised two other possible situations where pure economic loss might be recovered, though these are obiter comments. 1. Adjoining Occupiers – if the latent defect in the claima

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372331576588

Tags
#law #negligence #pel #tort
Question
It should be noted that in some cases, where there is a ‘special relationship’, the courts may allow a claim by a third party for pure economic loss. Most of the cases in this area involve [...]. See, for example, Ross v Caunters [1980] Ch 297, White v Jones [1995] 2 AC 207, Carr- Glynn v Frearsons (a firm) [1998] 4 All ER 225 and Walker v Geo H. Medicott & Son [1999] 1 All ER 685.
Answer
solicitors incorrectly drafting wills so as to deny potential beneficiaries receiving inheritance


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
It should be noted that in some cases, where there is a ‘special relationship’, the courts may allow a claim by a third party for pure economic loss. Most of the cases in this area involve solicitors incorrectly drafting wills so as to deny potential beneficiaries receiving inheritance. See, for example, Ross v Caunters [1980] Ch 297, White v Jones [1995] 2 AC 207, Carr- Glynn v Frearsons (a firm) [1998] 4 All ER 225 and Walker v Geo H. Medicott & Son [1999] 1

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372332625164

Tags
#law #negligence #pel #tort
Question
It should be noted that in some cases, where [...], the courts may allow a claim by a third party for pure economic loss. Most of the cases in this area involve solicitors incorrectly drafting wills so as to deny potential beneficiaries receiving inheritance. See, for example, Ross v Caunters [1980] Ch 297, White v Jones [1995] 2 AC 207, Carr- Glynn v Frearsons (a firm) [1998] 4 All ER 225 and Walker v Geo H. Medicott & Son [1999] 1 All ER 685.
Answer
there is a ‘special relationship’


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
It should be noted that in some cases, where there is a ‘special relationship’, the courts may allow a claim by a third party for pure economic loss. Most of the cases in this area involve solicitors incorrectly drafting wills so as to deny potential beneficiari

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372333673740

Tags
#law #negligence #pel #tort
Question
It should be noted that in some cases, where there is a ‘special relationship’, the courts may allow a claim by [...]. Most of the cases in this area involve solicitors incorrectly drafting wills so as to deny potential beneficiaries receiving inheritance. See, for example, Ross v Caunters [1980] Ch 297, White v Jones [1995] 2 AC 207, Carr- Glynn v Frearsons (a firm) [1998] 4 All ER 225 and Walker v Geo H. Medicott & Son [1999] 1 All ER 685.
Answer
a third party for pure economic loss


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
It should be noted that in some cases, where there is a ‘special relationship’, the courts may allow a claim by a third party for pure economic loss. Most of the cases in this area involve solicitors incorrectly drafting wills so as to deny potential beneficiaries receiving inheritance. See, for example, Ross v Caunters [1980] Ch

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372334722316

Tags
#law #negligence #pel #tort
Question
In the Caparo case Lord Bridge indicated that if [...] then there might be a special relationship.
Answer
specific advice was given for a specific purpose


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
In the Caparo case Lord Bridge indicated that if specific advice was given for a specific purpose then there might be a special relationship.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372335770892

Tags
#law #negligence #pel #tort
Question
Williams v Natural Life Health Foods Ltd [1998] 1 WLR 830
Answer
The plaintiffs took a franchise from a company set up by the second defendant. The failure of the second defendant to assume responsibility in respect of this franchise, via contact or personal dealings of a direct or indirect nature with the plaintiff, led the House of Lords to conclude that there was no special relationship between the claimant and the second defendant.


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
In Williams v Natural Life Health Foods Ltd [1998] 1 WLR 830 the plaintiffs took a franchise from a company set up by the second defendant. The failure of the second defendant to assume responsibility in respect of this franchise, via contact or

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372337605900

Tags
#law #negligence #pel #tort
Question
The plaintiffs took a franchise from a company set up by the second defendant. The failure of the second defendant to assume responsibility in respect of this franchise, via contact or personal dealings of a direct or indirect nature with the plaintiff, led the House of Lords to conclude that there was no special relationship between the claimant and the second defendant.
Answer
Williams v Natural Life Health Foods Ltd [1998] 1 WLR 830


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
In Williams v Natural Life Health Foods Ltd [1998] 1 WLR 830 the plaintiffs took a franchise from a company set up by the second defendant. The failure of the second defendant to assume responsibility in respect of this franchise, via contact or

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372339440908

Tags
#law #negligence #pel #tort
Question
In Williams v Natural Life Health Foods Ltd [1998] 1 WLR 830 the plaintiffs took a franchise from a company set up by the second defendant. The failure of the second defendant to assume responsibility in respect of this franchise, via contact or personal dealings of a direct or indirect nature with the plaintiff, led the House of Lords to conclude that [...].
Answer
there was no special relationship between the claimant and the second defendant


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
by the second defendant. The failure of the second defendant to assume responsibility in respect of this franchise, via contact or personal dealings of a direct or indirect nature with the plaintiff, led the House of Lords to conclude that <span>there was no special relationship between the claimant and the second defendant.<span><body><html>

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372340489484

Tags
#law #negligence #pel #tort
Question
In Williams v Natural Life Health Foods Ltd [1998] 1 WLR 830 the plaintiffs took a franchise from a company set up by the second defendant. The [...], led the House of Lords to conclude that there was no special relationship between the claimant and the second defendant.
Answer
failure of the second defendant to assume responsibility in respect of this franchise, via contact or personal dealings of a direct or indirect nature with the plaintiff


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
In Williams v Natural Life Health Foods Ltd [1998] 1 WLR 830 the plaintiffs took a franchise from a company set up by the second defendant. The failure of the second defendant to assume responsibility in respect of this franchise, via contact or personal dealings of a direct or indirect nature with the plaintiff, led the House of Lords to conclude that there was no special relationship between the claimant and the second defendant.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372343373068

Tags
#law #negligence #pel #tort
Question
The case of [ case ] makes it clear that any attempt to rely on a disclaimer of responsibility will now be subject to the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977.
Answer
Smith v Eric S. Bush [1989] 2 WLR 790


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
The case of Smith v Eric S. Bush [1989] 2 WLR 790 makes it clear that any attempt to rely on a disclaimer of responsibility will now be subject to the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372345208076

Tags
#law #negligence #pel #tort
Question
The case of Smith v Eric S. Bush [1989] 2 WLR 790 makes it clear that any attempt to rely on a disclaimer of responsibility will now be subject to [ statute ].
Answer
the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
The case of Smith v Eric S. Bush [1989] 2 WLR 790 makes it clear that any attempt to rely on a disclaimer of responsibility will now be subject to the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372347043084

Tags
#law #negligence #pel #tort
Question
The case of Smith v Eric S. Bush [1989] 2 WLR 790 makes it clear that any attempt to rely on a disclaimer of responsibility will now be subject to the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977.

Section 2 of the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977 regulates [...]. Section 1(3) makes it clear that this section only applies to defendants acting in the course of business. By virtue of s 2(1) any purported disclaimer of responsibility for negligence is invalid in so far as it tries to limit, exclude or restrict liability for death or personal injury. In relation to other negligently caused damage, the disclaimer must satisfy the test of reasonableness (s 2(2)). What is reasonable will depend on all the circumstances of the case (see s 11 and Sch 2).
Answer
attempts to restrict or exclude negligence liability


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
of Smith v Eric S. Bush [1989] 2 WLR 790 makes it clear that any attempt to rely on a disclaimer of responsibility will now be subject to the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977. Section 2 of the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977 regulates <span>attempts to restrict or exclude negligence liability. Section 1(3) makes it clear that this section only applies to defendants acting in the course of business. By virtue of s 2(1) any purported disclaimer of responsibility for negligence

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372348091660

Tags
#law #negligence #pel #tort
Question
The case of Smith v Eric S. Bush [1989] 2 WLR 790 makes it clear that any attempt to rely on a disclaimer of responsibility will now be subject to the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977.

Section [...] of the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977 regulates attempts to restrict or exclude negligence liability. Section 1(3) makes it clear that this section only applies to defendants acting in the course of business. By virtue of s 2(1) any purported disclaimer of responsibility for negligence is invalid in so far as it tries to limit, exclude or restrict liability for death or personal injury. In relation to other negligently caused damage, the disclaimer must satisfy the test of reasonableness (s 2(2)). What is reasonable will depend on all the circumstances of the case (see s 11 and Sch 2).
Answer
2


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
The case of Smith v Eric S. Bush [1989] 2 WLR 790 makes it clear that any attempt to rely on a disclaimer of responsibility will now be subject to the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977. Section 2 of the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977 regulates attempts to restrict or exclude negligence liability. Section 1(3) makes it clear that this section only applies to defendants acting in t

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372349664524

Tags
#law #negligence #pel #tort
Question
The case of Smith v Eric S. Bush [1989] 2 WLR 790 makes it clear that any attempt to rely on a disclaimer of responsibility will now be subject to the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977.

Section 2 of the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977 regulates attempts to restrict or exclude negligence liability. Section [...] makes it clear that this section only applies to defendants acting in the course of business. By virtue of s 2(1) any purported disclaimer of responsibility for negligence is invalid in so far as it tries to limit, exclude or restrict liability for death or personal injury. In relation to other negligently caused damage, the disclaimer must satisfy the test of reasonableness (s 2(2)). What is reasonable will depend on all the circumstances of the case (see s 11 and Sch 2).
Answer
1(3)


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
ny attempt to rely on a disclaimer of responsibility will now be subject to the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977. Section 2 of the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977 regulates attempts to restrict or exclude negligence liability. Section <span>1(3) makes it clear that this section only applies to defendants acting in the course of business. By virtue of s 2(1) any purported disclaimer of responsibility for negligence is invalid in

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372350713100

Tags
#law #negligence #pel #tort
Question
The case of Smith v Eric S. Bush [1989] 2 WLR 790 makes it clear that any attempt to rely on a disclaimer of responsibility will now be subject to the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977.

Section 2 of the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977 regulates attempts to restrict or exclude negligence liability. Section 1(3) makes it clear that [...]. By virtue of s 2(1) any purported disclaimer of responsibility for negligence is invalid in so far as it tries to limit, exclude or restrict liability for death or personal injury. In relation to other negligently caused damage, the disclaimer must satisfy the test of reasonableness (s 2(2)). What is reasonable will depend on all the circumstances of the case (see s 11 and Sch 2).
Answer
this section only applies to defendants acting in the course of business


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
isclaimer of responsibility will now be subject to the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977. Section 2 of the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977 regulates attempts to restrict or exclude negligence liability. Section 1(3) makes it clear that <span>this section only applies to defendants acting in the course of business. By virtue of s 2(1) any purported disclaimer of responsibility for negligence is invalid in so far as it tries to limit, exclude or restrict liability for death or personal injury. In

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372351761676

Tags
#law #negligence #pel #tort
Question
The case of Smith v Eric S. Bush [1989] 2 WLR 790 makes it clear that any attempt to rely on a disclaimer of responsibility will now be subject to the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977.

Section 2 of the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977 regulates attempts to restrict or exclude negligence liability. Section 1(3) makes it clear that this section only applies to defendants acting in the course of business. By virtue of s [...] any purported disclaimer of responsibility for negligence is invalid in so far as it tries to limit, exclude or restrict liability for death or personal injury. In relation to other negligently caused damage, the disclaimer must satisfy the test of reasonableness (s 2(2)). What is reasonable will depend on all the circumstances of the case (see s 11 and Sch 2).
Answer
2(1)


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
3; Section 2 of the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977 regulates attempts to restrict or exclude negligence liability. Section 1(3) makes it clear that this section only applies to defendants acting in the course of business. By virtue of s <span>2(1) any purported disclaimer of responsibility for negligence is invalid in so far as it tries to limit, exclude or restrict liability for death or personal injury. In relation to other negl

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372352810252

Tags
#law #negligence #pel #tort
Question
The case of Smith v Eric S. Bush [1989] 2 WLR 790 makes it clear that any attempt to rely on a disclaimer of responsibility will now be subject to the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977.

Section 2 of the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977 regulates attempts to restrict or exclude negligence liability. Section 1(3) makes it clear that this section only applies to defendants acting in the course of business. By virtue of s 2(1) [...]. In relation to other negligently caused damage, the disclaimer must satisfy the test of reasonableness (s 2(2)). What is reasonable will depend on all the circumstances of the case (see s 11 and Sch 2).
Answer
any purported disclaimer of responsibility for negligence is invalid in so far as it tries to limit, exclude or restrict liability for death or personal injury


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
13; Section 2 of the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977 regulates attempts to restrict or exclude negligence liability. Section 1(3) makes it clear that this section only applies to defendants acting in the course of business. By virtue of s 2(1) <span>any purported disclaimer of responsibility for negligence is invalid in so far as it tries to limit, exclude or restrict liability for death or personal injury. In relation to other negligently caused damage, the disclaimer must satisfy the test of reasonableness (s 2(2)). What is reasonable will depend on all the circumstances of the case (se

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372353858828

Tags
#law #negligence #pel #tort
Question
The case of Smith v Eric S. Bush [1989] 2 WLR 790 makes it clear that any attempt to rely on a disclaimer of responsibility will now be subject to the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977.

Section 2 of the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977 regulates attempts to restrict or exclude negligence liability. Section 1(3) makes it clear that this section only applies to defendants acting in the course of business. By virtue of s 2(1) any purported disclaimer of responsibility for negligence is invalid in so far as it tries to limit, exclude or restrict liability for death or personal injury. In relation to other negligently caused damage, the disclaimer must satisfy the test of reasonableness (s [...]). What is reasonable will depend on all the circumstances of the case (see s 11 and Sch 2).
Answer
2(2)


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
of responsibility for negligence is invalid in so far as it tries to limit, exclude or restrict liability for death or personal injury. In relation to other negligently caused damage, the disclaimer must satisfy the test of reasonableness (s <span>2(2)). What is reasonable will depend on all the circumstances of the case (see s 11 and Sch 2).<span><body><html>

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372354907404

Tags
#law #negligence #pel #tort
Question
The case of Smith v Eric S. Bush [1989] 2 WLR 790 makes it clear that any attempt to rely on a disclaimer of responsibility will now be subject to the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977.

Section 2 of the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977 regulates attempts to restrict or exclude negligence liability. Section 1(3) makes it clear that this section only applies to defendants acting in the course of business. By virtue of s 2(1) any purported disclaimer of responsibility for negligence is invalid in so far as it tries to limit, exclude or restrict liability for death or personal injury. In relation to other negligently caused damage, the disclaimer must [...] (s 2(2)). What is reasonable will depend on all the circumstances of the case (see s 11 and Sch 2).
Answer
satisfy the test of reasonableness


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
tue of s 2(1) any purported disclaimer of responsibility for negligence is invalid in so far as it tries to limit, exclude or restrict liability for death or personal injury. In relation to other negligently caused damage, the disclaimer must <span>satisfy the test of reasonableness (s 2(2)). What is reasonable will depend on all the circumstances of the case (see s 11 and Sch 2).<span><body><html>

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372355955980

Tags
#law #negligence #pel #tort
Question
The case of Smith v Eric S. Bush [1989] 2 WLR 790 makes it clear that any attempt to rely on a disclaimer of responsibility will now be subject to the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977.

Section 2 of the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977 regulates attempts to restrict or exclude negligence liability. Section 1(3) makes it clear that this section only applies to defendants acting in the course of business. By virtue of s 2(1) any purported disclaimer of responsibility for negligence is invalid in so far as it tries to limit, exclude or restrict liability for death or personal injury. In relation to other negligently caused damage, the disclaimer must satisfy the test of reasonableness (s 2(2)). What is reasonable will depend on [...] (see s 11 and Sch 2).
Answer
all the circumstances of the case


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
lid in so far as it tries to limit, exclude or restrict liability for death or personal injury. In relation to other negligently caused damage, the disclaimer must satisfy the test of reasonableness (s 2(2)). What is reasonable will depend on <span>all the circumstances of the case (see s 11 and Sch 2).<span><body><html>

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372357004556

Tags
#law #negligence #pel #tort
Question
The case of Smith v Eric S. Bush [1989] 2 WLR 790 makes it clear that any attempt to rely on a disclaimer of responsibility will now be subject to the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977.

Section 2 of the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977 regulates attempts to restrict or exclude negligence liability. Section 1(3) makes it clear that this section only applies to defendants acting in the course of business. By virtue of s 2(1) any purported disclaimer of responsibility for negligence is invalid in so far as it tries to limit, exclude or restrict liability for death or personal injury. In relation to other negligently caused damage, the disclaimer must satisfy the test of reasonableness (s 2(2)). What is reasonable will depend on all the circumstances of the case (see s [...]).
Answer
11 and Sch 2


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
de or restrict liability for death or personal injury. In relation to other negligently caused damage, the disclaimer must satisfy the test of reasonableness (s 2(2)). What is reasonable will depend on all the circumstances of the case (see s <span>11 and Sch 2).<span><body><html>

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372358053132

Tags
#law #negligence #pel #tort
Question
Ministry of Housing v Sharp CA [1970] 2 QB 223
Answer
The defendants negligently omitted to tell X, a purchaser of land, about the plaintiff’s charge on the land. This meant that X was not bound by the charge and so the plaintiffs suffered financial loss. This loss was as a result of the defendant’s careless statement to X, which X relied on, causing the plaintiff to suffer loss. The court awarded compensation as the defendant had breached a statutory duty that was designed to protect the plaintiff.


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
In Ministry of Housing v Sharp CA [1970] 2 QB 223 the defendants negligently omitted to tell X, a purchaser of land, about the plaintiff’s charge on the land. This meant that X was not bound by the charge and so the plaintiffs suffere

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372359888140

Tags
#law #negligence #pel #tort
Question
The defendants negligently omitted to tell X, a purchaser of land, about the plaintiff’s charge on the land. This meant that X was not bound by the charge and so the plaintiffs suffered financial loss. This loss was as a result of the defendant’s careless statement to X, which X relied on, causing the plaintiff to suffer loss. The court awarded compensation as the defendant had breached a statutory duty that was designed to protect the plaintiff.
Answer
Ministry of Housing v Sharp CA [1970] 2 QB 223


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
In Ministry of Housing v Sharp CA [1970] 2 QB 223 the defendants negligently omitted to tell X, a purchaser of land, about the plaintiff’s charge on the land. This meant that X was not bound by the charge and so the plaintiffs suffere

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372364082444

Tags
#defences #law #negligence #tort
Question
See [ case ] which applies the defence of contributory negligence to pure economic loss.
Answer
Platform Home Loan Ltd v Oyston Shipways Ltd & Others [1998] Ch 466


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
See Platform Home Loan Ltd v Oyston Shipways Ltd & Others [1998] Ch 466 which applies the defence of contributory negligence to pure economic loss.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372365917452

Tags
#defences #law #negligence #tort
Question
See Platform Home Loan Ltd v Oyston Shipways Ltd & Others [1998] Ch 466 which [...].
Answer
applies the defence of contributory negligence to pure economic loss


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
See Platform Home Loan Ltd v Oyston Shipways Ltd & Others [1998] Ch 466 which applies the defence of contributory negligence to pure economic loss.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372366966028

Tags
#law #negligence #tort #vl
Question
A person who engages an independent contractor is [...]. This is known as the ‘Personal Duty Theory’. As such they are responsible for their own actions and should take appropriate precautions, including obtaining professional indemnity insurance, (Rowe v Herman [1997] 1 WLR 1390) although the courts have not always been consistent in their approach to this issue.
Answer
not generally liable for torts committed by them in the course of their work


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
A person who engages an independent contractor is not generally liable for torts committed by them in the course of their work. This is known as the ‘Personal Duty Theory’. As such they are responsible for their own actions and should take appropriate precautions, including obtaining professional indemnity in

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372368014604

Tags
#law #negligence #tort #vl
Question
A person who engages an independent contractor is not generally liable for torts committed by them in the course of their work. This is known as the ‘Personal Duty Theory’. As such they are responsible for their own actions and should [...], (Rowe v Herman [1997] 1 WLR 1390) although the courts have not always been consistent in their approach to this issue.
Answer
take appropriate precautions, including obtaining professional indemnity insurance


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
A person who engages an independent contractor is not generally liable for torts committed by them in the course of their work. This is known as the ‘Personal Duty Theory’. As such they are responsible for their own actions and should take appropriate precautions, including obtaining professional indemnity insurance, (Rowe v Herman [1997] 1 WLR 1390) although the courts have not always been consistent in their approach to this issue.<span><body><html>

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372369063180

Tags
#law #negligence #tort #vl
Question
A person who engages an independent contractor is not generally liable for torts committed by them in the course of their work. This is known as the ‘Personal Duty Theory’. As such they are responsible for their own actions and should take appropriate precautions, including obtaining professional indemnity insurance, ([ case ]) although the courts have not always been consistent in their approach to this issue.
Answer
Rowe v Herman [1997] 1 WLR 1390


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
committed by them in the course of their work. This is known as the ‘Personal Duty Theory’. As such they are responsible for their own actions and should take appropriate precautions, including obtaining professional indemnity insurance, (<span>Rowe v Herman [1997] 1 WLR 1390) although the courts have not always been consistent in their approach to this issue.<span><body><html>

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372370898188

Tags
#law #negligence #tort #vl
Question
The courts have traditionally applied a stricter approach to cases involving an employee’s criminal activities when determining if they are within the course of employment. As a general rule, there is a presumption that [...]. This, however, is not an inflexible rule and the courts appear to have taken a more liberal approach when considering this issue in recent years.
Answer
such activity is outside the course of employment


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
ad>The courts have traditionally applied a stricter approach to cases involving an employee’s criminal activities when determining if they are within the course of employment. As a general rule, there is a presumption that such activity is outside the course of employment. This, however, is not an inflexible rule and the courts appear to have taken a more liberal approach when considering this issue in recent years.<html>

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372371946764

Tags
#law #negligence #tort #vl
Question
The courts have traditionally applied a stricter approach to [...]. As a general rule, there is a presumption that such activity is outside the course of employment. This, however, is not an inflexible rule and the courts appear to have taken a more liberal approach when considering this issue in recent years.
Answer
cases involving an employee’s criminal activities when determining if they are within the course of employment


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
The courts have traditionally applied a stricter approach to cases involving an employee’s criminal activities when determining if they are within the course of employment. As a general rule, there is a presumption that such activity is outside the course of employment. This, however, is not an inflexible rule and the courts appear to have taken a more

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372374568204

Tags
#law #negligence #tort #vl
Question
In deviation cases, the issue arises as to how much of a detour from an authorised route a driver can make before it can be said that [...]. A new and independent journey that has nothing to do with his employment is not covered by vicarious liability.
Answer
he is on a frolic of his own


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
In deviation cases, the issue arises as to how much of a detour from an authorised route a driver can make before it can be said that he is on a frolic of his own. A new and independent journey that has nothing to do with his employment is not covered by vicarious liability.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372375616780

Tags
#law #negligence #tort #vl
Question
In deviation cases, the issue arises as to how much of a detour from an authorised route a driver can make before it can be said that he is on a frolic of his own. A [...] is not covered by vicarious liability.
Answer
new and independent journey that has nothing to do with his employment


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
In deviation cases, the issue arises as to how much of a detour from an authorised route a driver can make before it can be said that he is on a frolic of his own. A new and independent journey that has nothing to do with his employment is not covered by vicarious liability.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372376665356

Tags
#law #negligence #tort #vl
Question
In deviation cases, the issue arises as to how much of a detour from an authorised route a driver can make before it can be said that he is on a frolic of his own. A new and independent journey that has nothing to do with his employment is [...].
Answer
not covered by vicarious liability


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
>In deviation cases, the issue arises as to how much of a detour from an authorised route a driver can make before it can be said that he is on a frolic of his own. A new and independent journey that has nothing to do with his employment is <span>not covered by vicarious liability.<span><body><html>

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372377713932

Tags
#law #negligence #tort #vl
Question
Makanjuola v Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis (1992), The Times, 8 August 1989
Answer
A Nigerian woman unsuccessfully claimed against the Police Commissioner for intimidation and sexual assault. She had consented to sex in return for a police officer refraining from reporting her alien status to the immigration authorities. Although s 48 Police Act 1964 stated that the Commissioner of Police would be vicariously liable for the actions of his police officers, this would only apply if such acts were in the course of the police officer’s employment. The police officer’s actions were not in the course of his employment.


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
An unusual situation arose in Makanjuola v Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis (1992), The Times, 8 August 1989 in which a Nigerian woman unsuccessfully claimed against the Police Commissioner for intimidation and sexual assault. She had consented to sex in return for a police officer refraining

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372379548940

Tags
#law #negligence #tort #vl
Question
A Nigerian woman unsuccessfully claimed against the Police Commissioner for intimidation and sexual assault. She had consented to sex in return for a police officer refraining from reporting her alien status to the immigration authorities. Although s 48 Police Act 1964 stated that the Commissioner of Police would be vicariously liable for the actions of his police officers, this would only apply if such acts were in the course of the police officer’s employment. The police officer’s actions were not in the course of his employment.
Answer
Makanjuola v Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis (1992), The Times, 8 August 1989


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
An unusual situation arose in Makanjuola v Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis (1992), The Times, 8 August 1989 in which a Nigerian woman unsuccessfully claimed against the Police Commissioner for intimidation and sexual assault. She had consented to sex in return for a police officer refraining

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372381383948

Tags
#law #negligence #tort #vl
Question
An unusual situation arose in Makanjuola v Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis (1992), The Times, 8 August 1989 in which a Nigerian woman unsuccessfully claimed against the Police Commissioner for intimidation and sexual assault. She had consented to sex in return for a police officer refraining from reporting her alien status to the immigration authorities. Although s 48 Police Act 1964 stated that the Commissioner of Police would be vicariously liable for the actions of his police officers, this would only apply if [...]. The police officer’s actions were not in the course of his employment.
Answer
such acts were in the course of the police officer’s employment


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
cer refraining from reporting her alien status to the immigration authorities. Although s 48 Police Act 1964 stated that the Commissioner of Police would be vicariously liable for the actions of his police officers, this would only apply if <span>such acts were in the course of the police officer’s employment. The police officer’s actions were not in the course of his employment.<span><body><html>

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372382432524

Tags
#law #negligence #tort #vicarious-liability
Question
Daniels v Whetstone Entertainments Ltd [1962] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 1
Answer
An employee (a ‘bouncer’) assaulted the plaintiff twice – once, during the course of a fracas inside his employer’s premises, and a second time, outside the night club. Whilst the employers were held liable for the first assault inside the club, they evaded liability for the second. This was seen as an act of personal revenge and was, therefore, outside the course of employment. (It was also a criminal act. The general rule is that criminal acts are normally outside the course of employment – see below.)


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Daniels v Whetstone Entertainments Ltd [1962] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 1, in which an employee (a ‘bouncer’) assaulted the plaintiff twice – once, during the course of a fracas inside his employer’s premises, and a second time, outside the night club. Whilst

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372384267532

Tags
#law #negligence #tort #vicarious-liability
Question
An employee (a ‘bouncer’) assaulted the plaintiff twice – once, during the course of a fracas inside his employer’s premises, and a second time, outside the night club. Whilst the employers were held liable for the first assault inside the club, they evaded liability for the second. This was seen as an act of personal revenge and was, therefore, outside the course of employment. (It was also a criminal act. The general rule is that criminal acts are normally outside the course of employment – see below.)
Answer
Daniels v Whetstone Entertainments Ltd [1962] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 1


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Daniels v Whetstone Entertainments Ltd [1962] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 1, in which an employee (a ‘bouncer’) assaulted the plaintiff twice – once, during the course of a fracas inside his employer’s premises, and a second time, outside the night club. Whilst

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372386102540

Tags
#law #negligence #tort #vicarious-liability
Question
Daniels v Whetstone Entertainments Ltd [1962] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 1, in which an employee (a ‘bouncer’) assaulted the plaintiff twice – once, during the course of a fracas inside his employer’s premises, and a second time, outside the night club. Whilst the employers were held liable for [...], they evaded liability for the second. This was seen as an act of personal revenge and was, therefore, outside the course of employment. (It was also a criminal act. The general rule is that criminal acts are normally outside the course of employment – see below.)
Answer
the first assault inside the club


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
1962] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 1, in which an employee (a ‘bouncer’) assaulted the plaintiff twice – once, during the course of a fracas inside his employer’s premises, and a second time, outside the night club. Whilst the employers were held liable for <span>the first assault inside the club, they evaded liability for the second. This was seen as an act of personal revenge and was, therefore, outside the course of employment. (It was also a criminal act. The general rule is

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372387151116

Tags
#law #negligence #tort #vicarious-liability
Question
Daniels v Whetstone Entertainments Ltd [1962] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 1, in which an employee (a ‘bouncer’) assaulted the plaintiff twice – once, during the course of a fracas inside his employer’s premises, and a second time, outside the night club. Whilst the employers were held liable for the first assault inside the club, [...]. This was seen as an act of personal revenge and was, therefore, outside the course of employment. (It was also a criminal act. The general rule is that criminal acts are normally outside the course of employment – see below.)
Answer
they evaded liability for the second


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
employee (a ‘bouncer’) assaulted the plaintiff twice – once, during the course of a fracas inside his employer’s premises, and a second time, outside the night club. Whilst the employers were held liable for the first assault inside the club, <span>they evaded liability for the second. This was seen as an act of personal revenge and was, therefore, outside the course of employment. (It was also a criminal act. The general rule is that criminal acts are normally outsi

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372388199692

Tags
#law #negligence #tort #vicarious-liability
Question
Daniels v Whetstone Entertainments Ltd [1962] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 1, in which an employee (a ‘bouncer’) assaulted the plaintiff twice – once, during the course of a fracas inside his employer’s premises, and a second time, outside the night club. Whilst the employers were held liable for the first assault inside the club, they evaded liability for the second. [ resoning ]. (It was also a criminal act. The general rule is that criminal acts are normally outside the course of employment – see below.)
Answer
This was seen as an act of personal revenge and was, therefore, outside the course of employment


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
laintiff twice – once, during the course of a fracas inside his employer’s premises, and a second time, outside the night club. Whilst the employers were held liable for the first assault inside the club, they evaded liability for the second. <span>This was seen as an act of personal revenge and was, therefore, outside the course of employment. (It was also a criminal act. The general rule is that criminal acts are normally outside the course of employment – see below.)<span><body><html>

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372390034700

Tags
#law #negligence #tort #vicarious-liability
Question
The favoured approach is not to apply one single test but to use an [...]. In Ready Mixed Concrete v Minister of Pensions [1968] 2 QB 497, the court had to consider the status of X who drove a concrete mixer. X was responsible for hiring, insuring and running the lorry and was paid by the company on the basis of his mileage. The company exercised control over uniform and colours of the lorry, but, despite this, the court held the driver to be an independent contractor.
Answer
‘economic reality, composite’ test, sometimes referred to as the ‘multiple factors’ test


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
The favoured approach is not to apply one single test but to use an ‘economic reality, composite’ test, sometimes referred to as the ‘multiple factors’ test. In Ready Mixed Concrete v Minister of Pensions [1968] 2 QB 497, the court had to consider the status of X who drove a concrete mixer. X was responsible for hiring, insuring and running

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372391083276

Tags
#law #negligence #tort #vicarious-liability
Question
The favoured approach is not to apply one single test but to use an ‘economic reality, composite’ test, sometimes referred to as the ‘multiple factors’ test. In [ case ], the court had to consider the status of X who drove a concrete mixer. X was responsible for hiring, insuring and running the lorry and was paid by the company on the basis of his mileage. The company exercised control over uniform and colours of the lorry, but, despite this, the court held the driver to be an independent contractor.
Answer
Ready Mixed Concrete v Minister of Pensions [1968] 2 QB 497


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
The favoured approach is not to apply one single test but to use an ‘economic reality, composite’ test, sometimes referred to as the ‘multiple factors’ test. In Ready Mixed Concrete v Minister of Pensions [1968] 2 QB 497, the court had to consider the status of X who drove a concrete mixer. X was responsible for hiring, insuring and running the lorry and was paid by the company on the basis of his milea

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372394491148

Tags
#law #negligence #tort #vicarious-liability
Question
The favoured approach is not to apply one single test but to use an ‘economic reality, composite’ test, sometimes referred to as the ‘multiple factors’ test. In Ready Mixed Concrete v Minister of Pensions [1968] 2 QB 497, the court had to consider the status of X who drove a concrete mixer. X was responsible for hiring, insuring and running the lorry and was paid by the company on the basis of his mileage. The company exercised control over uniform and colours of the lorry, but, despite this, the court held the driver to be [...].
Answer
an independent contractor


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
xer. X was responsible for hiring, insuring and running the lorry and was paid by the company on the basis of his mileage. The company exercised control over uniform and colours of the lorry, but, despite this, the court held the driver to be <span>an independent contractor.<span><body><html>

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372395539724

Tags
#law #negligence #tort #vicarious-liability
Question
There is no need to prove fault on the part of the defendant. The defendant who is vicariously liable incurs [...]. Vicarious liability merely provides a convenient device to enable a claimant, in certain cases, to look beyond the immediate cause of his harm to a person who is often in a better position to pay compensation, e.g. the employer.
Answer
strict liability


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
There is no need to prove fault on the part of the defendant. The defendant who is vicariously liable incurs strict liability. Vicarious liability merely provides a convenient device to enable a claimant, in certain cases, to look beyond the immediate cause of his harm to a person who is often in a better posi

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372396588300

Tags
#law #negligence #tort #vicarious-liability
Question
There is [...]. The defendant who is vicariously liable incurs strict liability. Vicarious liability merely provides a convenient device to enable a claimant, in certain cases, to look beyond the immediate cause of his harm to a person who is often in a better position to pay compensation, e.g. the employer.
Answer
no need to prove fault on the part of the defendant


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
There is no need to prove fault on the part of the defendant. The defendant who is vicariously liable incurs strict liability. Vicarious liability merely provides a convenient device to enable a claimant, in certain cases, to look beyond the imme

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372397636876

Tags
#law #negligence #tort #vl
Question
Mattis v Pollock (t/a Flamingo’s Nightclub) [2004] 4 All ER 85
Answer
A bouncer was chased out of the defendant’s nightclub where he was an employee. The bouncer ran to his home and returned with a knife. A short distance away from the nightclub he came across a group of people, including the claimant, some of whom had been involved in the earlier incident. The bouncer grabbed the claimant and stabbed him in the back, causing him severe injuries. The Court of Appeal held that since the stabbing represented the culmination of the incident that had started within the club, the nightclub was liable for the bouncer’s assault on the claimant. Approaching the matter broadly, at the moment when the claimant was stabbed, the defendant’s responsibility for the bouncer’s actions was not extinguished.


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
A similar conclusion to Fennelly was reached in Mattis v Pollock (t/a Flamingo’s Nightclub) [2004] 4 All ER 85. A bouncer was chased out of the defendant’s nightclub where he was an employee. The bouncer ran to his home and returned with a knife. A short distance away from the nightclub he cam

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372399471884

Tags
#law #negligence #tort #vl
Question
A bouncer was chased out of the defendant’s nightclub where he was an employee. The bouncer ran to his home and returned with a knife. A short distance away from the nightclub he came across a group of people, including the claimant, some of whom had been involved in the earlier incident. The bouncer grabbed the claimant and stabbed him in the back, causing him severe injuries. The Court of Appeal held that since the stabbing represented the culmination of the incident that had started within the club, the nightclub was liable for the bouncer’s assault on the claimant. Approaching the matter broadly, at the moment when the claimant was stabbed, the defendant’s responsibility for the bouncer’s actions was not extinguished.
Answer
Mattis v Pollock (t/a Flamingo’s Nightclub) [2004] 4 All ER 85


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
A similar conclusion to Fennelly was reached in Mattis v Pollock (t/a Flamingo’s Nightclub) [2004] 4 All ER 85. A bouncer was chased out of the defendant’s nightclub where he was an employee. The bouncer ran to his home and returned with a knife. A short distance away from the nightclub he cam

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372401306892

Tags
#law #negligence #tort #vl
Question
A similar conclusion to Fennelly was reached in Mattis v Pollock (t/a Flamingo’s Nightclub) [2004] 4 All ER 85. A bouncer was chased out of the defendant’s nightclub where he was an employee. The bouncer ran to his home and returned with a knife. A short distance away from the nightclub he came across a group of people, including the claimant, some of whom had been involved in the earlier incident. The bouncer grabbed the claimant and stabbed him in the back, causing him severe injuries. The Court of Appeal held that [...]. Approaching the matter broadly, at the moment when the claimant was stabbed, the defendant’s responsibility for the bouncer’s actions was not extinguished.
Answer
since the stabbing represented the culmination of the incident that had started within the club, the nightclub was liable for the bouncer’s assault on the claimant


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
tclub he came across a group of people, including the claimant, some of whom had been involved in the earlier incident. The bouncer grabbed the claimant and stabbed him in the back, causing him severe injuries. The Court of Appeal held that <span>since the stabbing represented the culmination of the incident that had started within the club, the nightclub was liable for the bouncer’s assault on the claimant. Approaching the matter broadly, at the moment when the claimant was stabbed, the defendant’s responsibility for the bouncer’s actions was not extinguished.<span><body></html

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372402355468

Tags
#law #negligence #tort #vl
Question
Irving v The Post Office [1987] IRLR 289
Answer
A postal worker was held to be on a ‘frolic of his own’ in writing racial abuse on letters addressed to the plaintiff. Although authorised to write on the mail, the abuse was not an authorised act.


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Similarly, in Irving v The Post Office [1987] IRLR 289, a postal worker was held to be on a ‘frolic of his own’ in writing racial abuse on letters addressed to the plaintiff. Although authorised to write on the mail, the abuse was not an

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372404190476

Tags
#law #negligence #tort #vl
Question
A postal worker was held to be on a ‘frolic of his own’ in writing racial abuse on letters addressed to the plaintiff. Although authorised to write on the mail, the abuse was not an authorised act.
Answer
Irving v The Post Office [1987] IRLR 289


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Similarly, in Irving v The Post Office [1987] IRLR 289, a postal worker was held to be on a ‘frolic of his own’ in writing racial abuse on letters addressed to the plaintiff. Although authorised to write on the mail, the abuse was not an

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372406025484

Tags
#law #negligence #tort #vl
Question
Similarly, in Irving v The Post Office [1987] IRLR 289, a postal worker was held to be on a ‘frolic of his own’ in writing racial abuse on letters addressed to the plaintiff. [resoning].
Answer
Although authorised to write on the mail, the abuse was not an authorised act


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Similarly, in Irving v The Post Office [1987] IRLR 289, a postal worker was held to be on a ‘frolic of his own’ in writing racial abuse on letters addressed to the plaintiff. Although authorised to write on the mail, the abuse was not an authorised act.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372407860492

Tags
#law #negligence #tort #vicarious-liability
Question
The court made it clear that the use of labels by either party as to the relationship would not be conclusive. It is just a factor to be considered. (2)
Answer
Massey v Crown Life Insurance [1978] 1 WLR 676 and Ferguson v John Dawson [1976] 1 WLR 1213


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
In both Massey v Crown Life Insurance [1978] 1 WLR 676 and Ferguson v John Dawson [1976] 1 WLR 1213 the court made it clear that the use of labels by either party as to the relationship would not be conclusive. It is just a factor to be considered.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372409695500

Tags
#law #negligence #tort #vicarious-liability
Question
In [ case ] a hospital was found vicariously liable even though there was only limited control over the doctor who performed the negligent operation.
Answer
Cassidy v Ministry of Health [1951] 2KB 343


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
In Cassidy v Ministry of Health [1951] 2KB 343 a hospital was found vicariously liable even though there was only limited control over the doctor who performed the negligent operation.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372411530508

Tags
#law #negligence #tort #vicarious-liability
Question
In Cassidy v Ministry of Health [1951] 2KB 343 a hospital was found vicariously liable even though [...].
Answer
there was only limited control over the doctor who performed the negligent operation


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
In Cassidy v Ministry of Health [1951] 2KB 343 a hospital was found vicariously liable even though there was only limited control over the doctor who performed the negligent operation.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372412579084

Tags
#law #negligence #tort #vicarious-liability
Question
In Cassidy v Ministry of Health [1951] 2KB 343 a hospital was found [...] even though there was only limited control over the doctor who performed the negligent operation.
Answer
vicariously liable


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
In Cassidy v Ministry of Health [1951] 2KB 343 a hospital was found vicariously liable even though there was only limited control over the doctor who performed the negligent operation.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372413627660

Tags
#law #negligence #tort #vicarious-liability
Question
It is essential to establish that [...] before the defendant can be made vicariously liable. If there is no tort there can be no vicarious liability. In the vast majority of cases the tort is negligence, although many cases are concerned with trespass to the person.
Answer
a tort has been committed by another person (X)


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
It is essential to establish that a tort has been committed by another person (X) before the defendant can be made vicariously liable. If there is no tort there can be no vicarious liability. In the vast majority of cases the tort is negligence, although many cases ar

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372414676236

Tags
#law #negligence #tort #vl
Question
Under s [...] Civil Liability (Contribution) Act 1978 an employer may be entitled to seek an indemnity from his employee should he be forced to pay damages in respect of the employee’s tort. The court will allow such a claim if it is ‘just and equitable’ to do so.
Answer
1(1)


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Under s 1(1) Civil Liability (Contribution) Act 1978 an employer may be entitled to seek an indemnity from his employee should he be forced to pay damages in respect of the employee’s tort. The cou

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372415724812

Tags
#law #negligence #tort #vl
Question
Under s 1(1) Civil Liability (Contribution) Act [ year ] an employer may be entitled to seek an indemnity from his employee should he be forced to pay damages in respect of the employee’s tort. The court will allow such a claim if it is ‘just and equitable’ to do so.
Answer
1978


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Under s 1(1) Civil Liability (Contribution) Act 1978 an employer may be entitled to seek an indemnity from his employee should he be forced to pay damages in respect of the employee’s tort. The court will allow such a claim if it is ‘jus

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372419132684

Tags
#law #negligence #tort #vl
Question
Under [statute] an employer may be entitled to seek an indemnity from his employee should he be forced to pay damages in respect of the employee’s tort. The court will allow such a claim if it is ‘just and equitable’ to do so.
Answer
s 1(1) Civil Liability (Contribution) Act 1978


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Under s 1(1) Civil Liability (Contribution) Act 1978 an employer may be entitled to seek an indemnity from his employee should he be forced to pay damages in respect of the employee’s tort. The court will allow such a claim if it is ‘jus

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372420967692

Tags
#law #negligence #tort #vl
Question
Under s 1(1) Civil Liability (Contribution) Act 1978 an employer may be entitled to [...]. The court will allow such a claim if it is ‘just and equitable’ to do so.
Answer
seek an indemnity from his employee should he be forced to pay damages in respect of the employee’s tort


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Under s 1(1) Civil Liability (Contribution) Act 1978 an employer may be entitled to seek an indemnity from his employee should he be forced to pay damages in respect of the employee’s tort. The court will allow such a claim if it is ‘just and equitable’ to do so.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372422016268

Tags
#law #negligence #tort #vl
Question
Conway v George Wimpey & Co [1951] 2 KB 266
Answer
Drivers were expressly prohibited from giving lifts to employees of other companies. The plaintiff was injured as a result of negligent driving by the employer’s driver. The defendants evaded vicarious liability as the driver was doing an expressly forbidden act.


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Similarly, in Conway v George Wimpey & Co [1951] 2 KB 266 drivers were expressly prohibited from giving lifts to employees of other companies. The plaintiff was injured as a result of negligent driving by the employer’s driver. The defendants

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372423851276

Tags
#law #negligence #tort #vl
Question
Drivers were expressly prohibited from giving lifts to employees of other companies. The plaintiff was injured as a result of negligent driving by the employer’s driver. The defendants evaded vicarious liability as the driver was doing an expressly forbidden act.
Answer
Conway v George Wimpey & Co [1951] 2 KB 266


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Similarly, in Conway v George Wimpey & Co [1951] 2 KB 266 drivers were expressly prohibited from giving lifts to employees of other companies. The plaintiff was injured as a result of negligent driving by the employer’s driver. The defendants

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372426472716

Tags
#law #negligence #tort #vicarious-liability
Question
Interestingly, in the case of [ case ] the Court of Appeal found that, in certain circumstances, given there is no binding authority against the concept of dual vicarious liability, it is possible for two parties to be vicariously liable for the actions of the same, negligent employee. Dual liability might occur where an employee is lent or transferred to work for another and both employers are entitled, and obliged, to control the employee’s actions so as to prevent the negligent act.
Answer
Viasystems Ltd v Thermal Transfer Ltd and Others [2005] EWCA Civ 1151


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Interestingly, in the case of Viasystems Ltd v Thermal Transfer Ltd and Others [2005] EWCA Civ 1151 the Court of Appeal found that, in certain circumstances, given there is no binding authority against the concept of dual vicarious liability, it is possible for two parties to be vicari

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372428307724

Tags
#law #negligence #tort #vicarious-liability
Question
Interestingly, in the case of Viasystems Ltd v Thermal Transfer Ltd and Others [2005] EWCA Civ 1151 the Court of Appeal found that, [...]. Dual liability might occur where an employee is lent or transferred to work for another and both employers are entitled, and obliged, to control the employee’s actions so as to prevent the negligent act.
Answer
in certain circumstances, given there is no binding authority against the concept of dual vicarious liability, it is possible for two parties to be vicariously liable for the actions of the same, negligent employee


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Interestingly, in the case of Viasystems Ltd v Thermal Transfer Ltd and Others [2005] EWCA Civ 1151 the Court of Appeal found that, in certain circumstances, given there is no binding authority against the concept of dual vicarious liability, it is possible for two parties to be vicariously liable for the actions of the same, negligent employee. Dual liability might occur where an employee is lent or transferred to work for another and both employers are entitled, and obliged, to control the employee’s actions so as to prevent

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372429356300

Tags
#law #negligence #tort
Question
[ case ] concerned a casual waiter found not to be an employee on the grounds that he had no obligation to work, nor did his employers have any obligation to provide him with work.
Answer
O’Kelly v Trusthouse Forte [1984] QB 90


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
O’Kelly v Trusthouse Forte [1984] QB 90 concerned a casual waiter found not to be an employee on the grounds that he had no obligation to work, nor did his employers have any obligation to provide him with work.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372431191308

Tags
#law #negligence #tort
Question
O’Kelly v Trusthouse Forte [1984] QB 90 concerned a casual waiter found not to be an employee on the grounds that [...].
Answer
he had no obligation to work, nor did his employers have any obligation to provide him with work


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
O’Kelly v Trusthouse Forte [1984] QB 90 concerned a casual waiter found not to be an employee on the grounds that he had no obligation to work, nor did his employers have any obligation to provide him with work.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372432239884

Tags
#law #negligence #tort #vl
Question
Majrowski v Guy’s and St Thomas’s NHS Trust [2005] EWCA Civ 251
Answer
The claimant alleged that he had been harassed by his manager within the meaning of s 1 of the Protection from Harassment Act 1997 and that their mutual employer was vicariously liable for the manager’s behaviour. It was held that vicarious liability could be imposed for breach of statutory duty as well as for common law claims, provided the test in Lister v Hesley Hall was made out.


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
The issue of whether an employer is vicariously liable for a breach of statutory duty by an employee was considered in Majrowski v Guy’s and St Thomas’s NHS Trust [2005] EWCA Civ 251. The claimant alleged that he had been harassed by his manager within the meaning of s 1 of the Protection from Harassment Act 1997 and that their mutual employer was vicariously liab

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372434074892

Tags
#law #negligence #tort #vl
Question
The claimant alleged that he had been harassed by his manager within the meaning of s 1 of the Protection from Harassment Act 1997 and that their mutual employer was vicariously liable for the manager’s behaviour. It was held that vicarious liability could be imposed for breach of statutory duty as well as for common law claims, provided the test in Lister v Hesley Hall was made out.
Answer
Majrowski v Guy’s and St Thomas’s NHS Trust [2005] EWCA Civ 251


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
The issue of whether an employer is vicariously liable for a breach of statutory duty by an employee was considered in Majrowski v Guy’s and St Thomas’s NHS Trust [2005] EWCA Civ 251. The claimant alleged that he had been harassed by his manager within the meaning of s 1 of the Protection from Harassment Act 1997 and that their mutual employer was vicariously liab

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372435909900

Tags
#law #negligence #tort #vl
Question
The issue of whether an employer is vicariously liable for a breach of statutory duty by an employee was considered in Majrowski v Guy’s and St Thomas’s NHS Trust [2005] EWCA Civ 251. The claimant alleged that he had been harassed by his manager within the meaning of s 1 of the Protection from Harassment Act 1997 and that their mutual employer was vicariously liable for the manager’s behaviour. It was held that [...].
Answer
vicarious liability could be imposed for breach of statutory duty as well as for common law claims, provided the test in Lister v Hesley Hall was made out


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Civ 251. The claimant alleged that he had been harassed by his manager within the meaning of s 1 of the Protection from Harassment Act 1997 and that their mutual employer was vicariously liable for the manager’s behaviour. It was held that <span>vicarious liability could be imposed for breach of statutory duty as well as for common law claims, provided the test in Lister v Hesley Hall was made out.<span><body><html>

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372436958476

Tags
#law #negligence #tort #vl
Question
Lister v Hesley Hall Ltd [2002] 1 AC 215
Answer
The defendant company, who ran a local authority childrens’ home, was held vicariously liable for sexual abuse committed by one of its employees, a house father. Lord Steyn stated that the correct approach when determining this issue ‘is to concentrate on the relative closeness of the connection between the nature of the employment and the particular tort.’ In this case, the warden’s torts were so closely connected with his employment that it was held to be fair and just to hold the employer vicariously liable.


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Similarly in Lister v Hesley Hall Ltd [2002] 1 AC 215 the defendant company, who ran a local authority childrens’ home, was held vicariously liable for sexual abuse committed by one of its employees, a house father. Lord Steyn stated that

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372438793484

Tags
#law #negligence #tort #vl
Question
The defendant company, who ran a local authority childrens’ home, was held vicariously liable for sexual abuse committed by one of its employees, a house father. Lord Steyn stated that the correct approach when determining this issue ‘is to concentrate on the relative closeness of the connection between the nature of the employment and the particular tort.’ In this case, the warden’s torts were so closely connected with his employment that it was held to be fair and just to hold the employer vicariously liable.
Answer
Lister v Hesley Hall Ltd [2002] 1 AC 215


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Similarly in Lister v Hesley Hall Ltd [2002] 1 AC 215 the defendant company, who ran a local authority childrens’ home, was held vicariously liable for sexual abuse committed by one of its employees, a house father. Lord Steyn stated that

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372440628492

Tags
#law #negligence #tort #vl
Question
Similarly in Lister v Hesley Hall Ltd [2002] 1 AC 215 the defendant company, who ran a local authority childrens’ home, was held vicariously liable for sexual abuse committed by one of its employees, a house father. Lord Steyn stated that the correct approach when determining this issue ‘is [...]’ In this case, the warden’s torts were so closely connected with his employment that it was held to be fair and just to hold the employer vicariously liable.
Answer
to concentrate on the relative closeness of the connection between the nature of the employment and the particular tort.


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
5 the defendant company, who ran a local authority childrens’ home, was held vicariously liable for sexual abuse committed by one of its employees, a house father. Lord Steyn stated that the correct approach when determining this issue ‘is <span>to concentrate on the relative closeness of the connection between the nature of the employment and the particular tort.’ In this case, the warden’s torts were so closely connected with his employment that it was held to be fair and just to hold the employer vicariously liable.<span><body></html

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372441677068

Tags
#law #negligence #tort #vl
Question
In [ case ] an office cleaner was held to be acting outside the course of employment in making long-distance telephone calls from the office she was supposed to be cleaning.
Answer
Heasmans v Clarity Cleaning [1987] ICR 949


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
In Heasmans v Clarity Cleaning [1987] ICR 949 an office cleaner was held to be acting outside the course of employment in making long-distance telephone calls from the office she was supposed to be cleaning.</

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372443512076

Tags
#law #negligence #tort #vl
Question
In Heasmans v Clarity Cleaning [1987] ICR 949 an office cleaner was held to be acting outside the course of employment in [...].
Answer
making long-distance telephone calls from the office she was supposed to be cleaning


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
In Heasmans v Clarity Cleaning [1987] ICR 949 an office cleaner was held to be acting outside the course of employment in making long-distance telephone calls from the office she was supposed to be cleaning.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372445084940

Tags
#law #negligence #tort #vl
Question
In Heasmans v Clarity Cleaning [1987] ICR 949 [...].
Answer
an office cleaner was held to be acting outside the course of employment in making long-distance telephone calls from the office she was supposed to be cleaning


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
In Heasmans v Clarity Cleaning [1987] ICR 949 an office cleaner was held to be acting outside the course of employment in making long-distance telephone calls from the office she was supposed to be cleaning.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372446133516

Tags
#law #negligence #tort #vl
Question
Much depends upon the extent of the deviation, whether travelling was in working time and the actual purpose of the journey. The leading authority is [ case ] in which two employees were injured in a car crash. As they had been paid travel expenses and they were within working hours, the House of Lords held that they were in the course of employment.
Answer
Smith v Stages [1989] 2 WLR 529


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Much depends upon the extent of the deviation, whether travelling was in working time and the actual purpose of the journey. The leading authority is Smith v Stages [1989] 2 WLR 529 in which two employees were injured in a car crash. As they had been paid travel expenses and they were within working hours, the House of Lords held that they were in the course of em

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372447968524

Tags
#law #negligence #tort #vl
Question
Much depends upon the extent of the deviation, whether travelling was in working time and the actual purpose of the journey. The leading authority is Smith v Stages [1989] 2 WLR 529 in which [...].
Answer
two employees were injured in a car crash. As they had been paid travel expenses and they were within working hours, the House of Lords held that they were in the course of employment


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Much depends upon the extent of the deviation, whether travelling was in working time and the actual purpose of the journey. The leading authority is Smith v Stages [1989] 2 WLR 529 in which two employees were injured in a car crash. As they had been paid travel expenses and they were within working hours, the House of Lords held that they were in the course of employment.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372449017100

Tags
#law #negligence #tort #vl
Question
Twine v Bean Express Ltd [1946] 62 TLR 458
Answer
Despite express instructions not to do so, a lorry driver (an employee) picked up a hitch-hiker, who was subsequently injured as a result of negligent driving. The Court of Appeal found that the hitch-hiker was a trespasser and the employee was not acting within the scope of his employment.


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
In Twine v Bean Express Ltd [1946] 62 TLR 458, despite express instructions not to do so, a lorry driver (an employee) picked up a hitch-hiker, who was subsequently injured as a result of negligent driving. The Court of Appeal fo

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372450852108

Tags
#law #negligence #tort #vl
Question
Despite express instructions not to do so, a lorry driver (an employee) picked up a hitch-hiker, who was subsequently injured as a result of negligent driving. The Court of Appeal found that the hitch-hiker was a trespasser and the employee was not acting within the scope of his employment.
Answer
Twine v Bean Express Ltd [1946] 62 TLR 458


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
In Twine v Bean Express Ltd [1946] 62 TLR 458, despite express instructions not to do so, a lorry driver (an employee) picked up a hitch-hiker, who was subsequently injured as a result of negligent driving. The Court of Appeal fo

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372452687116

Tags
#law #negligence #tort #vl
Question
In Twine v Bean Express Ltd [1946] 62 TLR 458, despite express instructions not to do so, a lorry driver (an employee) picked up a hitch-hiker, who was subsequently injured as a result of negligent driving. The Court of Appeal found that [...].
Answer
the hitch-hiker was a trespasser and the employee was not acting within the scope of his employment


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
an>In Twine v Bean Express Ltd [1946] 62 TLR 458, despite express instructions not to do so, a lorry driver (an employee) picked up a hitch-hiker, who was subsequently injured as a result of negligent driving. The Court of Appeal found that <span>the hitch-hiker was a trespasser and the employee was not acting within the scope of his employment.<span><body><html>

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372453735692

Tags
#law #negligence #tort
Question
As a general rule the courts have adopted a wide interpretation in establishing what is not in the course of employment. If the employee’s act was not carried out in the course of employment, he will be deemed to have been on a ‘frolic of his own’ ([ case ]) and the employer will not be vicariously liable. This is so if an employee acts outside the scope of his employment, i.e. does something he is not authorised to do or performs an act he is expressly prohibited from carrying out.
Answer
Joel v Morrison (1834) 6 C & P 501


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
eral rule the courts have adopted a wide interpretation in establishing what is not in the course of employment. If the employee’s act was not carried out in the course of employment, he will be deemed to have been on a ‘frolic of his own’ (<span>Joel v Morrison (1834) 6 C & P 501) and the employer will not be vicariously liable. This is so if an employee acts outside the scope of his employment, i.e. does something he is not authorised to do or performs an act

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372455570700

Tags
#law #negligence #tort
Question
Various Claimants v Institute of the Brothers of the Christian Schools [2012] UKSC 56
Answer
The Institute, an unincorporated association of lay brothers of the Catholic Church, was held vicariously liable for the acts of brothers supplied to teach in a residential school who abused pupils. Lord Phillips stated that the policy underlying vicarious liability ‘is to ensure, so far as it is fair, just and reasonable, that liability for a tortious wrong is borne by a defendant with the means to compensate the victim’. These decisions leave uncertainty as to the boundaries of vicarious liability, and they also demonstrate, once again, the extent to which policy pervades tort law.


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
In Various Claimants v Institute of the Brothers of the Christian Schools [2012] UKSC 56 the Institute, an unincorporated association of lay brothers of the Catholic Church, was held vicariously liable for the acts of brothers supplied to teach in a residential school who

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372457405708

Tags
#law #negligence #tort
Question
The Institute, an unincorporated association of lay brothers of the Catholic Church, was held vicariously liable for the acts of brothers supplied to teach in a residential school who abused pupils. Lord Phillips stated that the policy underlying vicarious liability ‘is to ensure, so far as it is fair, just and reasonable, that liability for a tortious wrong is borne by a defendant with the means to compensate the victim’. These decisions leave uncertainty as to the boundaries of vicarious liability, and they also demonstrate, once again, the extent to which policy pervades tort law.
Answer
Various Claimants v Institute of the Brothers of the Christian Schools [2012] UKSC 56


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
In Various Claimants v Institute of the Brothers of the Christian Schools [2012] UKSC 56 the Institute, an unincorporated association of lay brothers of the Catholic Church, was held vicariously liable for the acts of brothers supplied to teach in a residential school who

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372459240716

Tags
#law #negligence #tort
Question
JGE v Trustees of the Portsmouth Roman Catholic Diocesan Trust [2012] EWCA Civ 938
Answer
The claimant sought damages for sexual abuse and rape carried out by a parish priest whilst she was living in a children’s home run by nuns. The court accepted that the priest was not an employee of the Roman Catholic diocese, but took the radical step of extending vicarious liability to a relationship ‘akin to employment’. The test was whether the relationship of the diocese and the priest was so close in character to one of employer/employee that it was just and fair to hold the diocese vicariously liable.


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
In JGE v Trustees of the Portsmouth Roman Catholic Diocesan Trust [2012] EWCA Civ 938 the claimant sought damages for sexual abuse and rape carried out by a parish priest whilst she was living in a children’s home run by nuns. The court accepted that the priest was not

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372461075724

Tags
#law #negligence #tort
Question
The claimant sought damages for sexual abuse and rape carried out by a parish priest whilst she was living in a children’s home run by nuns. The court accepted that the priest was not an employee of the Roman Catholic diocese, but took the radical step of extending vicarious liability to a relationship ‘akin to employment’. The test was whether the relationship of the diocese and the priest was so close in character to one of employer/employee that it was just and fair to hold the diocese vicariously liable.
Answer
JGE v Trustees of the Portsmouth Roman Catholic Diocesan Trust [2012] EWCA Civ 938


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
In JGE v Trustees of the Portsmouth Roman Catholic Diocesan Trust [2012] EWCA Civ 938 the claimant sought damages for sexual abuse and rape carried out by a parish priest whilst she was living in a children’s home run by nuns. The court accepted that the priest was not

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372462910732

Tags
#law #negligence #tort
Question
In JGE v Trustees of the Portsmouth Roman Catholic Diocesan Trust [2012] EWCA Civ 938 the claimant sought damages for sexual abuse and rape carried out by a parish priest whilst she was living in a children’s home run by nuns. The court accepted that the priest was not an employee of the Roman Catholic diocese, but took the radical step of extending vicarious liability to [...]. The test was whether the relationship of the diocese and the priest was so close in character to one of employer/employee that it was just and fair to hold the diocese vicariously liable.
Answer
a relationship ‘akin to employment’


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
rape carried out by a parish priest whilst she was living in a children’s home run by nuns. The court accepted that the priest was not an employee of the Roman Catholic diocese, but took the radical step of extending vicarious liability to <span>a relationship ‘akin to employment’. The test was whether the relationship of the diocese and the priest was so close in character to one of employer/employee that it was just and fair to hold the diocese vicariously li

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372463959308

Tags
#law #negligence #tort
Question
In JGE v Trustees of the Portsmouth Roman Catholic Diocesan Trust [2012] EWCA Civ 938 the claimant sought damages for sexual abuse and rape carried out by a parish priest whilst she was living in a children’s home run by nuns. The court accepted that the priest was not an employee of the Roman Catholic diocese, but took the radical step of extending vicarious liability to a relationship ‘akin to employment’. The test was [...].
Answer
whether the relationship of the diocese and the priest was so close in character to one of employer/employee that it was just and fair to hold the diocese vicariously liable


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
s living in a children’s home run by nuns. The court accepted that the priest was not an employee of the Roman Catholic diocese, but took the radical step of extending vicarious liability to a relationship ‘akin to employment’. The test was <span>whether the relationship of the diocese and the priest was so close in character to one of employer/employee that it was just and fair to hold the diocese vicariously liable.<span><body><html>

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372465794316

Tags
#law #negligence #tort
Question
Inside the Course of Employment therefore employer vicariously liable: [ case ] in which a lorry driver caused an explosion by carelessly smoking a cigarette whilst filling his lorry with petrol.
Answer
Century Insurance v Northern Ireland Road Transport Board [1942] AC 509


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Inside the Course of Employment therefore employer vicariously liable: Century Insurance v Northern Ireland Road Transport Board [1942] AC 509 in which a lorry driver caused an explosion by carelessly smoking a cigarette whilst filling his lorry with petrol.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372467629324

Tags
#law #negligence #tort
Question
Inside the Course of Employment therefore employer vicariously liable: Century Insurance v Northern Ireland Road Transport Board [1942] AC 509 in which [...].
Answer
a lorry driver caused an explosion by carelessly smoking a cigarette whilst filling his lorry with petrol


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Inside the Course of Employment therefore employer vicariously liable: Century Insurance v Northern Ireland Road Transport Board [1942] AC 509 in which a lorry driver caused an explosion by carelessly smoking a cigarette whilst filling his lorry with petrol.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372469464332

Tags
#law #negligence #tort #vicarious-liability
Question
Inside the Course of Employment therefore employer vicariously liable: [ case ] in which an over-zealous railway porter charged with ensuring that customers were on the correct train, injured the plaintiff whilst pulling him from the correct train.
Answer
Bayley v Manchester, Sheffield and Lincolnshire Railway (1873) LR 8 CP 148


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Inside the Course of Employment therefore employer vicariously liable: Bayley v Manchester, Sheffield and Lincolnshire Railway (1873) LR 8 CP 148 in which an over-zealous railway porter charged with ensuring that customers were on the correct train, injured the plaintiff whilst pulling him from the correct train.</bo

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372471299340

Tags
#law #negligence #tort #vicarious-liability
Question
Inside the Course of Employment therefore employer vicariously liable: Bayley v Manchester, Sheffield and Lincolnshire Railway (1873) LR 8 CP 148 in which [...].
Answer
an over-zealous railway porter charged with ensuring that customers were on the correct train, injured the plaintiff whilst pulling him from the correct train


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Inside the Course of Employment therefore employer vicariously liable: Bayley v Manchester, Sheffield and Lincolnshire Railway (1873) LR 8 CP 148 in which an over-zealous railway porter charged with ensuring that customers were on the correct train, injured the plaintiff whilst pulling him from the correct train.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372473134348

Tags
#law #negligence #tort #vicarious-liability
Question
Inside the Course of Employment therefore employer vicariously liable: [ case ] in which the plaintiff was injured as a result of a bus driver’s racing his bus with another driver.
Answer
Limpus v London General Omnibus Co (1862) 1H&C 526


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Inside the Course of Employment therefore employer vicariously liable: Limpus v London General Omnibus Co (1862) 1H&C 526 in which the plaintiff was injured as a result of a bus driver’s racing his bus with another driver.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372474969356

Tags
#law #negligence #tort #vicarious-liability
Question
Inside the Course of Employment therefore employer vicariously liable: Limpus v London General Omnibus Co (1862) 1H&C 526 in which [...].
Answer
the plaintiff was injured as a result of a bus driver’s racing his bus with another driver


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Inside the Course of Employment therefore employer vicariously liable: Limpus v London General Omnibus Co (1862) 1H&C 526 in which the plaintiff was injured as a result of a bus driver’s racing his bus with another driver.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372476017932

Tags
#contract #law #remedies
Question
Where a contract of personal service contains a negative term, the enforcement of which would amount either to a decree of specific performance of the positive part of the contract or to a decree under which the defendant would have to choose between complying with the positive terms or remaining idle, the court will [...].
Answer
not grant an injunction


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
of which would amount either to a decree of specific performance of the positive part of the contract or to a decree under which the defendant would have to choose between complying with the positive terms or remaining idle, the court will <span>not grant an injunction. <span><body><html>

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372477066508

Tags
#contract #law #remedies
Question
Where [...] contains a negative term, the enforcement of which would amount either to a decree of specific performance of the positive part of the contract or to a decree under which the defendant would have to choose between complying with the positive terms or remaining idle, the court will not grant an injunction.
Answer
a contract of personal service


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Where a contract of personal service contains a negative term, the enforcement of which would amount either to a decree of specific performance of the positive part of the contract or to a decree under which the defendant

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372478115084

Tags
#contract #law #remedies
Question
Where a contract of personal service contains [...], the court will not grant an injunction.
Answer
a negative term, the enforcement of which would amount either to a decree of specific performance of the positive part of the contract or to a decree under which the defendant would have to choose between complying with the positive terms or remaining idle


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Where a contract of personal service contains a negative term, the enforcement of which would amount either to a decree of specific performance of the positive part of the contract or to a decree under which the defendant would have to choose between complying with the positive terms or remaining idle, the court will not grant an injunction.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372479163660

Tags
#contract #law #remedies
Question
Specific performance will not be awarded where it would cause undue hardship on the defendant
Answer
Patel v Ali [1984] Ch 283


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Specific performance will not be awarded where it would cause undue hardship on the defendant: Patel v Ali [1984] Ch 283.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372480998668

Tags
#contract #law #remedies
Question
Specific performance will not be awarded where [...]: Patel v Ali [1984] Ch 283.
Answer
it would cause undue hardship on the defendant


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Specific performance will not be awarded where it would cause undue hardship on the defendant: Patel v Ali [1984] Ch 283.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372482047244

Tags
#contract #law #remedies
Question
Specific performance will not be awarded for breach of an obligation to perform a series of acts that would need the constant supervision of the court. Thus building contracts are specifically enforceable only in certain special circumstances:
Answer
Co- operative Insurance Society Ltd v Argyll Stores (Holdings) Ltd [1998] AC 1.


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Specific performance will not be awarded for breach of an obligation to perform a series of acts that would need the constant supervision of the court. Thus building contracts are specifically enforceable only in certain special circumstances: Co- operative Insurance Society Ltd v Argyll Stores (Holdings) Ltd [1998] AC 1.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372483882252

Tags
#contract #law #remedies
Question
Specific performance will not be awarded for breach of an obligation to perform [...] Thus building contracts are specifically enforceable only in certain special circumstances: Co- operative Insurance Society Ltd v Argyll Stores (Holdings) Ltd [1998] AC 1.
Answer
a series of acts that would need the constant supervision of the court.


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Specific performance will not be awarded for breach of an obligation to perform a series of acts that would need the constant supervision of the court. Thus building contracts are specifically enforceable only in certain special circumstances: Co- operative Insurance Society Ltd v Argyll Stores (Holdings) Ltd [1998] AC 1.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372484930828

Tags
#contract #law #remedies
Question
Specific performance will not be awarded for breach of a contract of personal services, e.g. contracts of employment:
Answer
De Francesco v Barnum (1890) 45 Ch D 430.


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Specific performance will not be awarded for breach of a contract of personal services, e.g. contracts of employment: De Francesco v Barnum (1890) 45 Ch D 430.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372486765836

Tags
#contract #law #remedies
Question
Specific performance will not be awarded for breach of [...], e.g. contracts of employment: De Francesco v Barnum (1890) 45 Ch D 430.
Answer
a contract of personal services


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Specific performance will not be awarded for breach of a contract of personal services, e.g. contracts of employment: De Francesco v Barnum (1890) 45 Ch D 430.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372488862988

Tags
#contract #law #remedies
Question
The court will take into account the conduct of the plaintiff when considering whether to grant specific performance, for he who comes to equity must come with clean hands:
Answer
Coatsworth v Johnson (1886) 55 LJQB 220.


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
The court will take into account the conduct of the plaintiff when considering whether to grant an injunction, for he who comes to equity must come with clean hands: Coatsworth v Johnson (1886) 55 LJQB 220.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372490960140

Tags
#contract #law #remedies
Question
The court will take into account the conduct of the plaintiff when considering whether to grant specific performance, for [...]: Coatsworth v Johnson (1886) 55 LJQB 220.
Answer
he who comes to equity must come with clean hands


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
The court will take into account the conduct of the plaintiff when considering whether to grant an injunction, for he who comes to equity must come with clean hands: Coatsworth v Johnson (1886) 55 LJQB 220.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372492008716

Tags
#contract #law #remedies
Question
The court will take into account [...] when considering whether to grant specific performance, for he who comes to equity must come with clean hands: Coatsworth v Johnson (1886) 55 LJQB 220.
Answer
the conduct of the plaintiff


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
The court will take into account the conduct of the plaintiff when considering whether to grant an injunction, for he who comes to equity must come with clean hands: Coatsworth v Johnson (1886) 55 LJQB 220.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372493057292

Tags
#contract #law #remedies
Question
Specific performance will never be granted where damages or a liquidated demand is appropriate and adequate:
Answer
Adderley v Dixon (1824) 3 S & S 607.


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Specific performance will never be granted where damages or a liquidated demand is appropriate and adequate: Adderley v Dixon (1824) 3 S & S 607.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372494892300

Tags
#contract #law #remedies
Question
Specific performance will never be granted where [...]: Adderley v Dixon (1824) 3 S & S 607.
Answer
damages or a liquidated demand is appropriate and adequate


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Specific performance will never be granted where damages or a liquidated demand is appropriate and adequate: Adderley v Dixon (1824) 3 S & S 607.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372499086604

Tags
#contract #law #remedies
Question
The action must be brought with reasonable promptness, for delay defeats the equities. Undue delay sufficient to cause the court to withhold an equitable remedy is known as laches:
Answer
Eads v Williams (1854) 4 De G Mac & g 674.


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
The action must be brought with reasonable promptness, for delay defeats the equities. Undue delay sufficient to cause the court to withhold an equitable remedy is known as laches: Eads v Williams (1854) 4 De G Mac & g 674.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372500921612

Tags
#contract #law #remedies
Question
The distinction between a quantum meruit and a claim for damages is that the former is [...], while the latter is a claim for compensation for a loss.
Answer
a claim for reasonable remuneration


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
The distinction between a quantum meruit and a claim for damages is that the former is a claim for reasonable remuneration, while the latter is a claim for compensation for a loss.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372501970188

Tags
#contract #law #remedies
Question
The distinction between a quantum meruit and a claim for damages is that the former is a claim for reasonable remuneration, while the latter is [...].
Answer
a claim for compensation for a loss


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
The distinction between a quantum meruit and a claim for damages is that the former is a claim for reasonable remuneration, while the latter is a claim for compensation for a loss.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372503018764

Tags
#contract #law #remedies
Question
Where the claimant's fault has contributed to the loss he has suffered, then the amount of damages he can recover for the breach of contract may be reduced on account of his [...].
Answer
contributory negligence


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Where the claimant's fault has contributed to the loss he has suffered, then the amount of damages he can recover for the breach of contract may be reduced on account of his contributory negligence.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372504067340

Tags
#contract #law #remedies
Question
Where [...], then the amount of damages he can recover for the breach of contract may be reduced on account of his contributory negligence.
Answer
the claimant's fault has contributed to the loss he has suffered


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Where the claimant's fault has contributed to the loss he has suffered, then the amount of damages he can recover for the breach of contract may be reduced on account of his contributory negligence.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372505115916

Tags
#contract #law #remedies
Question
The duty to mitigate does not, however, preclude a party, when suing on a debt, from going to the expense of performing his side of the contract after the other party has wrongfully repudiated the contract:
Answer
White & Carter v McGregor [1962] AC 413.


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
The duty to mitigate does not, however, preclude a party, when suing on a debt, from going to the expense of performing his side of the contract after the other party has wrongfully repudiated the contract: White & Carter v McGregor [1962] AC 413.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372506950924

Tags
#contract #law #remedies
Question
The duty to mitigate does not, however, preclude a party, when suing on a debt, from [...]: White & Carter v McGregor [1962] AC 413.
Answer
going to the expense of performing his side of the contract after the other party has wrongfully repudiated the contract


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
The duty to mitigate does not, however, preclude a party, when suing on a debt, from going to the expense of performing his side of the contract after the other party has wrongfully repudiated the contract: White & Carter v McGregor [1962] AC 413.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372507999500

Tags
#contract #law #remedies
Question
The question of what steps are reasonable is one of fact. In [ case ], it was held that there was no expectation that the plaintiff should embark on 'a complicated and difficult piece of litigation' in order to minimise the effects of the defendant's breach.
Answer
Pilkington v Wood [1953] CH 770


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
The question of what steps are reasonable is one of fact. In Pilkington v Wood [1953] CH 770, it was held that there was no expectation that the plaintiff should embark on 'a complicated and difficult piece of litigation' in order to minimise the effects of the defendant's br

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372509834508

Tags
#contract #law #remedies
Question
The question of what steps are reasonable is one of fact. In Pilkington v Wood [1953] CH 770, it was held that [...].
Answer
there was no expectation that the plaintiff should embark on 'a complicated and difficult piece of litigation' in order to minimise the effects of the defendant's breach


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
The question of what steps are reasonable is one of fact. In Pilkington v Wood [1953] CH 770, it was held that there was no expectation that the plaintiff should embark on 'a complicated and difficult piece of litigation' in order to minimise the effects of the defendant's breach.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372510883084

Tags
#contract #law #remedies
Question
In the case of [ case ], the House of Lords, in applying Hadley v Baxendale, confirmed that what was in the contemplation (or knowledge) of the parties was to be judged at the time of contracting, as opposed to the time of the breach.
Answer
Jackson v Royal Bank of Scotland [2005] UKHL 3


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
In the case of Jackson v Royal Bank of Scotland [2005] UKHL 3, the House of Lords, in applying Hadley v Baxendale, confirmed that what was in the contemplation (or knowledge) of the parties was to be judged at the time of contracting, as opposed

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372512718092

Tags
#contract #law #remedies
Question
In the case of Jackson v Royal Bank of Scotland [2005] UKHL 3, the House of Lords, in applying Hadley v Baxendale, confirmed that what was in the contemplation (or knowledge) of the parties was to be judged [...].
Answer
at the time of contracting, as opposed to the time of the breach


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
ml>In the case of Jackson v Royal Bank of Scotland [2005] UKHL 3, the House of Lords, in applying Hadley v Baxendale, confirmed that what was in the contemplation (or knowledge) of the parties was to be judged at the time of contracting, as opposed to the time of the breach.<html>

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372513766668

Tags
#contract #law #remedies
Question
In terms of a novus actus interveniens, if the intervening event was 'likely to happen' it generally will not be held to break the chain of causation.
Answer
Monarch Steamship Co Ltd v A/B Karlshamns Oljefabriker [1949] AC 196


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
In terms of a novus actus interveniens, if the intervening event was 'likely to happen' (Monarch Steamship Co Ltd v A/B Karlshamns Oljefabriker [1949] AC 196) it generally will not be held to break the chain of causation.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372515601676

Tags
#contract #law #remedies
Question
In terms of a novus actus interveniens, if [...] (Monarch Steamship Co Ltd v A/B Karlshamns Oljefabriker [1949] AC 196) it generally will not be held to break the chain of causation.
Answer
the intervening event was 'likely to happen'


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
In terms of a novus actus interveniens, if the intervening event was 'likely to happen' (Monarch Steamship Co Ltd v A/B Karlshamns Oljefabriker [1949] AC 196) it generally will not be held to break the chain of causation.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372516650252

Tags
#contract #law #remedies
Question
In terms of a novus actus interveniens, if the intervening event was 'likely to happen' (Monarch Steamship Co Ltd v A/B Karlshamns Oljefabriker [1949] AC 196) it generally will [...].
Answer
not be held to break the chain of causation


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
In terms of a novus actus interveniens, if the intervening event was 'likely to happen' (Monarch Steamship Co Ltd v A/B Karlshamns Oljefabriker [1949] AC 196) it generally will not be held to break the chain of causation.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372517698828

Tags
#contract #law #remedies
Question
[ case ] confirmed that damages for distress and injury to feelings resulting from the manner of dismissal are unavailable in the law of contract.
Answer
Johnson v Unisys Ltd [2003] 1 AC 518


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Johnson v Unisys Ltd [2003] 1 AC 518 confirmed that damages for distress and injury to feelings resulting from the manner of dismissal are unavailable in the law of contract.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372519533836

Tags
#contract #law #remedies
Question
Johnson v Unisys Ltd [2003] 1 AC 518 confirmed that damages for [...] are unavailable in the law of contract.
Answer
distress and injury to feelings resulting from the manner of dismissal


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Johnson v Unisys Ltd [2003] 1 AC 518 confirmed that damages for distress and injury to feelings resulting from the manner of dismissal are unavailable in the law of contract.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372520582412

Tags
#contract #law #remedies
Question
Johnson v Unisys Ltd [2003] 1 AC 518 confirmed that damages for distress and injury to feelings resulting from the manner of dismissal are [...].
Answer
unavailable in the law of contract


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Johnson v Unisys Ltd [2003] 1 AC 518 confirmed that damages for distress and injury to feelings resulting from the manner of dismissal are unavailable in the law of contract.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372522155276

Tags
#contract #law #remedies
Question
Damages for mental distress will generally be unavailable in a 'purely commercial contract'
Answer
Hayes v Dodd [1990] 2 All ER 815


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Damages for mental distress will generally be unavailable in a 'purely commercial contract' (Hayes v Dodd [1990] 2 All ER 815).

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372523990284

Tags
#contract #law #remedies
Question
As a final and important point, reliance losses are [...]. Losses incurred remedying defective performance are not, therefore, reliance losses.
Answer
losses incurred prior to breach, not those incurred as a consequence of breach


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
As a final and important point, reliance losses are losses incurred prior to breach, not those incurred as a consequence of breach. Losses incurred remedying defective performance are not, therefore, reliance losses.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372525038860

Tags
#contract #law #remedies
Question
It is for the defendant to prove that the claimant would not have recouped the expenditure had the contract gone ahead
Answer
Omak Maritime Ltd v Mamola Challenger Shipping Co Ltd [2010] EWHC 2026


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
It is for the defendant to prove that the claimant would not have recouped the expenditure had the contract gone ahead (Omak Maritime Ltd v Mamola Challenger Shipping Co Ltd [2010] EWHC 2026).

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372526873868

Tags
#contract #law #remedies
Question
It is for [...] to prove that the claimant would not have recouped the expenditure had the contract gone ahead (Omak Maritime Ltd v Mamola Challenger Shipping Co Ltd [2010] EWHC 2026).
Answer
the defendant


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
It is for the defendant to prove that the claimant would not have recouped the expenditure had the contract gone ahead (Omak Maritime Ltd v Mamola Challenger Shipping Co Ltd [2010] EWHC 2026).</

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372528708876

Tags
#contract #law #remedies
Question
The reliance measure is backward looking (unlike the expectation measure which is forward looking) and aims [...].
Answer
to put the claimant in the position they would have been in had they never contracted


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
The reliance measure is backward looking (unlike the expectation measure which is forward looking) and aims to put the claimant in the position they would have been in had they never contracted.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372529757452

Tags
#contract #law #remedies
Question
An alternative basis for the assessment of damages is the reliance measure. This measure allows [...].
Answer
the claimant to recover the (wasted) expenses that have been incurred in preparing for, or in part performance of, the contract


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
An alternative basis for the assessment of damages is the reliance measure. This measure allows the claimant to recover the (wasted) expenses that have been incurred in preparing for, or in part performance of, the contract.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372530806028

Tags
#contract #law #remedies
Question
In a commercial setting, it would be 'unusual, if not impossible' for damages to be awarded for loss of amenity
Answer
Regus (UK) Ltd v Epcot Solutions Ltd [2007] EWHC 938 (Comm)


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
In a commercial setting, it would be 'unusual, if not impossible' for damages to be awarded for loss of amenity (Regus (UK) Ltd v Epcot Solutions Ltd [2007] EWHC 938 (Comm)).

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372532641036

Tags
#contract #law #remedies
Question
The courts have developed three alternative mechanisms for calculating the expectation interest: (3)
Answer
  1. cost of cure,
  2. diminution in value, and
  3. loss of amenity.


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
The courts have developed three alternative mechanisms for calculating the expectation interest: cost of cure, diminution in value, and loss of amenity.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372534476044

Tags
#contract #law #remedies
Question
The courts have developed three alternative mechanisms for calculating the [...]: cost of cure, diminution in value, and loss of amenity.
Answer
expectation interest


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
The courts have developed three alternative mechanisms for calculating the expectation interest: cost of cure, diminution in value, and loss of amenity.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372535524620

Tags
#contract #law #remedies
Question
Alternatively, the claimant's expectation interest may be calculated by [...].
Answer
reference to the difference in value between the performance received and that promised in the contract (diminution in value)


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Alternatively, the claimant's expectation interest may be calculated by reference to the difference in value between the performance received and that promised in the contract (diminution in value).

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372536573196

Tags
#contract #law #remedies
Question
The aim of an award of damages for breach of contract is [...]. The aim is not to punish the defendant – exemplary damages are not available in the law of contract.
Answer
to compensate the claimant for the damage, loss or injury he has suffered as a result of the defendant's breach


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
The aim of an award of damages for breach of contract is to compensate the claimant for the damage, loss or injury he has suffered as a result of the defendant's breach. The aim is not to punish the defendant – exemplary damages are not available in the law of contract.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372537621772

Tags
#contract #law #remedies
Question
Where the agreed damages clause represents [...], the courts will hold this to be a valid liquidated damages clause.
Answer
a genuine pre-assessment of the loss that would flow from any particular breach, and the parties stipulate accordingly in their contract that this sum shall be payable in the event of a breach


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Where the agreed damages clause represents a genuine pre-assessment of the loss that would flow from any particular breach, and the parties stipulate accordingly in their contract that this sum shall be payable in the event of a breach, the courts will hold this to be a valid liquidated damages clause.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372538670348

Tags
#contract #law #remedies
Question
William Robinson & Co Ltd v Heuer (1898) 2 Ch 451
Answer
Where a negative term forbade the defendant to engage in, 'any trade, business, or calling, either relating to goods of any description sold or manufactured by the plaintiff or in any other business whatsoever' the court severed the negative term. An injunction was granted, not to restrain the defendant from engaging in 'any other business whatsoever', but framed so as to give the claimant a reasonable protection and no more


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
business whatsoever' the court severed the negative term. An injunction was granted, not to restrain the defendant from engaging in 'any other business whatsoever', but framed so as to give the claimant a reasonable protection and no more: <span>William Robinson & Co Ltd v Heuer (1898) 2 Ch 451.<span><body><html>

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372540505356

Tags
#contract #law #remedies
Question
Where a negative term forbade the defendant to engage in, 'any trade, business, or calling, either relating to goods of any description sold or manufactured by the plaintiff or in any other business whatsoever' the court severed the negative term. An injunction was granted, not to restrain the defendant from engaging in 'any other business whatsoever', but framed so as to give the claimant a reasonable protection and no more
Answer
William Robinson & Co Ltd v Heuer (1898) 2 Ch 451


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
business whatsoever' the court severed the negative term. An injunction was granted, not to restrain the defendant from engaging in 'any other business whatsoever', but framed so as to give the claimant a reasonable protection and no more: <span>William Robinson & Co Ltd v Heuer (1898) 2 Ch 451.<span><body><html>

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372542340364

Tags
#contract #law #remedies
Question
Evening Standard v Henderson [1987] ICR 588
Answer
A newspaper company was granted an interlocutory injunction to restrain an employee production manager from working for a rival newspaper during his contractual notice period as long as the company continued to provide him with remuneration and other contractual benefits without insisting that he perform any services for it


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
In Evening Standard v Henderson [1987] ICR 588, a newspaper company was granted an interlocutory injunction to restrain an employee production manager from working for a rival newspaper during his contractual notice period as long

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372544175372

Tags
#contract #law #remedies
Question
A newspaper company was granted an interlocutory injunction to restrain an employee production manager from working for a rival newspaper during his contractual notice period as long as the company continued to provide him with remuneration and other contractual benefits without insisting that he perform any services for it.
Answer
Evening Standard v Henderson [1987] ICR 588


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
In Evening Standard v Henderson [1987] ICR 588, a newspaper company was granted an interlocutory injunction to restrain an employee production manager from working for a rival newspaper during his contractual notice period as long

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372546010380

Tags
#contract #law #remedies
Question
The court has a discretionary power to grant an injunction to restrain the breach of a negative term of a contract even though the positive part of the contract is not specifically enforceable, e.g. in the case of a contract of personal service. The rationale of the jurisdiction to grant an injunction to restrain a breach of contract was explained by Lord St Leonards LC, in [ case ]:

Wherever this court has not proper jurisdiction to enforce specific performance, it operates to bind men's consciences, so far as they can be bound, to a true and literal performance of their agreements; and it will not suffer them to depart from their contracts at their pleasure, leaving the party with whom they have contracted to the mere chance of any damages which a jury may give. The exercise of this jurisdiction has, I believe, had a wholesome tendency towards the maintenance of that good faith which exists in this country to a much greater degree perhaps than in any other; and although the jurisdiction is not to be extended, yet a judge would desert his duty who did not act up to what his predecessors have handed down as the rule for his guidance in the administration of such an equity.

Answer
Lumley v Wagner (1852) 1 De GM & G 604


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
itive part of the contract is not specifically enforceable, e.g. in the case of a contract of personal service. The rationale of the jurisdiction to grant an injunction to restrain a breach of contract was explained by Lord St Leonards LC, in <span>Lumley v Wagner (1852) 1 De GM & G 604: Wherever this court has not proper jurisdiction to enforce specific performance, it operates to bind men's consciences, so far as they can be bound, to a true and literal

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372547845388

Tags
#contract #law #remedies
Question
The court has a discretionary power to grant an injunction to restrain the breach of a negative term of a contract even though [...], e.g. in the case of a contract of personal service. The rationale of the jurisdiction to grant an injunction to restrain a breach of contract was explained by Lord St Leonards LC, in Lumley v Wagner (1852) 1 De GM & G 604:

Wherever this court has not proper jurisdiction to enforce specific performance, it operates to bind men's consciences, so far as they can be bound, to a true and literal performance of their agreements; and it will not suffer them to depart from their contracts at their pleasure, leaving the party with whom they have contracted to the mere chance of any damages which a jury may give. The exercise of this jurisdiction has, I believe, had a wholesome tendency towards the maintenance of that good faith which exists in this country to a much greater degree perhaps than in any other; and although the jurisdiction is not to be extended, yet a judge would desert his duty who did not act up to what his predecessors have handed down as the rule for his guidance in the administration of such an equity.

Answer
the positive part of the contract is not specifically enforceable


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
The court has a discretionary power to grant an injunction to restrain the breach of a negative term of a contract even though the positive part of the contract is not specifically enforceable, e.g. in the case of a contract of personal service. The rationale of the jurisdiction to grant an injunction to restrain a breach of contract was explained by Lord St Leonards LC, in L

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372548893964

Tags
#contract #law #remedies
Question
The Judicial Committee of the Privy Council has stated that in respect of specific performance, the court must first consider whether there has been any want of good faith, honesty or righteous dealings on the part of the applicant and then consider whether to exercise the discretion to grant the remedy in all the circumstances of the case, which may include any misconduct on the part of the defendant:
Answer
Sang Lee Investment Co v Wing Kwai Investment Co (The Times, April 14 1983).


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
The Judicial Committee of the Privy Council has stated that in respect of specific performance, the court must first consider whether there has been any want of good faith, honesty or righteous dealings on the part of the applicant and then consider whether to exercise the discretion to grant the remedy in all the circumstances of the case, which may include any misconduct on the part of the defendant: Sang Lee Investment Co v Wing Kwai Investment Co (The Times, April 14 1983).

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372550728972

Tags
#contract #law #remedies
Question
The Judicial Committee of the Privy Council has stated that [...], the court must first consider whether there has been any want of good faith, honesty or righteous dealings on the part of the applicant and then consider whether to exercise the discretion to grant the remedy in all the circumstances of the case, which may include any misconduct on the part of the defendant: Sang Lee Investment Co v Wing Kwai Investment Co (The Times, April 14 1983).
Answer
in respect of specific performance


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
The Judicial Committee of the Privy Council has stated that in respect of specific performance, the court must first consider whether there has been any want of good faith, honesty or righteous dealings on the part of the applicant and then consider whether to exercise the dis

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372552301836

Tags
#contract #law #remedies
Question
The Judicial Committee of the Privy Council has stated that in respect of specific performance, the court must first consider [...] and then consider whether to exercise the discretion to grant the remedy in all the circumstances of the case, which may include any misconduct on the part of the defendant: Sang Lee Investment Co v Wing Kwai Investment Co (The Times, April 14 1983).
Answer
whether there has been any want of good faith, honesty or righteous dealings on the part of the applicant


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
The Judicial Committee of the Privy Council has stated that in respect of specific performance, the court must first consider whether there has been any want of good faith, honesty or righteous dealings on the part of the applicant and then consider whether to exercise the discretion to grant the remedy in all the circumstances of the case, which may include any misconduct on the part of the defendant: Sang Lee I

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372553350412

Tags
#contract #law #remedies
Question
The Judicial Committee of the Privy Council has stated that in respect of specific performance, the court must first consider whether there has been any want of good faith, honesty or righteous dealings on the part of the applicant and then consider [...]: Sang Lee Investment Co v Wing Kwai Investment Co (The Times, April 14 1983).
Answer
whether to exercise the discretion to grant the remedy in all the circumstances of the case, which may include any misconduct on the part of the defendant


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
ial Committee of the Privy Council has stated that in respect of specific performance, the court must first consider whether there has been any want of good faith, honesty or righteous dealings on the part of the applicant and then consider <span>whether to exercise the discretion to grant the remedy in all the circumstances of the case, which may include any misconduct on the part of the defendant: Sang Lee Investment Co v Wing Kwai Investment Co (The Times, April 14 1983).<span><body><html>

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372554398988

Tags
#contract #law #remedies
Question
A decree of specific performance is issued by the court to the defendant, requiring him to carry out his undertaking exactly according to the terms of the contract. Specific performance is an equitable remedy and is available only where [...]. Generally, this means that specific performance is available only where the payment of a sum of money would not be an adequate remedy. Specific performance is, therefore, an appropriate remedy in cases of breach of a contract for the sale or lease of land, or of breach of contract for the sale of something that is not readily available on the market, e.g. a rare book.
Answer
there is no adequate remedy at common law or under a statute


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
pan>A decree of specific performance is issued by the court to the defendant, requiring him to carry out his undertaking exactly according to the terms of the contract. Specific performance is an equitable remedy and is available only where <span>there is no adequate remedy at common law or under a statute. Generally, this means that specific performance is available only where the payment of a sum of money would not be an adequate remedy. Specific performance is, therefore, an appropri

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372555447564

Tags
#contract #law #remedies
Question
A decree of specific performance is issued by the court to the defendant, requiring him to carry out his undertaking exactly according to the terms of the contract. Specific performance is an equitable remedy and is available only where there is no adequate remedy at common law or under a statute. Generally, this means that specific performance is available only where [...]. Specific performance is, therefore, an appropriate remedy in cases of breach of a contract for the sale or lease of land, or of breach of contract for the sale of something that is not readily available on the market, e.g. a rare book.
Answer
the payment of a sum of money would not be an adequate remedy


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
ing to the terms of the contract. Specific performance is an equitable remedy and is available only where there is no adequate remedy at common law or under a statute. Generally, this means that specific performance is available only where <span>the payment of a sum of money would not be an adequate remedy. Specific performance is, therefore, an appropriate remedy in cases of breach of a contract for the sale or lease of land, or of breach of contract for the sale of something that is n

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372556496140

Tags
#contract #law #remedies
Question
A decree of specific performance is issued by the court to the defendant, requiring him to carry out his undertaking exactly according to the terms of the contract. Specific performance is an equitable remedy and is available only where there is no adequate remedy at common law or under a statute. Generally, this means that specific performance is available only where the payment of a sum of money would not be an adequate remedy. Specific performance is, therefore, an appropriate remedy in cases of breach of a contract for [...].
Answer
the sale or lease of land, or of breach of contract for the sale of something that is not readily available on the market, e.g. a rare book


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
a statute. Generally, this means that specific performance is available only where the payment of a sum of money would not be an adequate remedy. Specific performance is, therefore, an appropriate remedy in cases of breach of a contract for <span>the sale or lease of land, or of breach of contract for the sale of something that is not readily available on the market, e.g. a rare book.<span><body><html>

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372557544716

Tags
#contract #law #remedies
Question
Dies v British and International Mining and Finance Co [1939] 1 KB 715
Answer
The claimant entered into a contract for the purchase of rifles and ammunition and made a part payment of £100,000. In breach of contract, the claimant refused to accept delivery, and the court held that he was able to recover the part payment from the defendants, even though this was subject to the defendants' right to recover damages for breach of contract. In reviewing the decision some 40 years later, the House of Lords, in Hyundai Shipbuilding and Heavy Industries Co Ltd v Papadopulos [1980] 1 WLR 1129, stated that in Dies the defendants, who had to return the part payment, had not incurred expenditure performing their contractual obligations. However, had they incurred expenditure, their Lordships suggested that the party in breach may not be able to recover the part payment.


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
In relation to a part payment, on the other hand, the general rule is that the part payment may be recovered by a party in breach of contract. In Dies v British and International Mining and Finance Co [1939] 1 KB 715, the claimant entered into a contract for the purchase of rifles and ammunition and made a part payment of £100,000. In breach of contract, the claimant refused to accept delivery, an

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372559379724

Tags
#contract #law #remedies
Question
The claimant entered into a contract for the purchase of rifles and ammunition and made a part payment of £100,000. In breach of contract, the claimant refused to accept delivery, and the court held that he was able to recover the part payment from the defendants, even though this was subject to the defendants' right to recover damages for breach of contract. In reviewing the decision some 40 years later, the House of Lords, in Hyundai Shipbuilding and Heavy Industries Co Ltd v Papadopulos [1980] 1 WLR 1129, stated that in Dies the defendants, who had to return the part payment, had not incurred expenditure performing their contractual obligations. However, had they incurred expenditure, their Lordships suggested that the party in breach may not be able to recover the part payment.
Answer
Dies v British and International Mining and Finance Co [1939] 1 KB 715


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
In relation to a part payment, on the other hand, the general rule is that the part payment may be recovered by a party in breach of contract. In Dies v British and International Mining and Finance Co [1939] 1 KB 715, the claimant entered into a contract for the purchase of rifles and ammunition and made a part payment of £100,000. In breach of contract, the claimant refused to accept delivery, an

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372561214732

Tags
#contract #law #remedies
Question
In relation to a part payment, on the other hand, the general rule is that the part payment may be recovered by a party in breach of contract.
Answer
Dies v British and International Mining and Finance Co [1939] 1 KB 715


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
In relation to a part payment, on the other hand, the general rule is that the part payment may be recovered by a party in breach of contract. In Dies v British and International Mining and Finance Co [1939] 1 KB 715, the claimant entered into a contract for the purchase of rifles and ammunition and made a part payment of £10

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372563836172

Tags
#contract #law #remedies
Question
In relation to a part payment, on the other hand, the general rule is that the part payment may be recovered by a party in breach of contract. In Dies v British and International Mining and Finance Co [1939] 1 KB 715, the claimant entered into a contract for the purchase of rifles and ammunition and made a part payment of £100,000. In breach of contract, the claimant refused to accept delivery, and the court held that he was able to recover the part payment from the defendants, even though [...]. In reviewing the decision some 40 years later, the House of Lords, in Hyundai Shipbuilding and Heavy Industries Co Ltd v Papadopulos [1980] 1 WLR 1129, stated that in Dies the defendants, who had to return the part payment, had not incurred expenditure performing their contractual obligations. However, had they incurred expenditure, their Lordships suggested that the party in breach may not be able to recover the part payment.
Answer
this was subject to the defendants' right to recover damages for breach of contract


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
for the purchase of rifles and ammunition and made a part payment of £100,000. In breach of contract, the claimant refused to accept delivery, and the court held that he was able to recover the part payment from the defendants, even though <span>this was subject to the defendants' right to recover damages for breach of contract. In reviewing the decision some 40 years later, the House of Lords, in Hyundai Shipbuilding and Heavy Industries Co Ltd v Papadopulos [1980] 1 WLR 1129, stated that in Dies the defend

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372564884748

Tags
#contract #law #remedies
Question
In relation to a part payment, on the other hand, the general rule is that the part payment may be recovered by a party in breach of contract. In Dies v British and International Mining and Finance Co [1939] 1 KB 715, the claimant entered into a contract for the purchase of rifles and ammunition and made a part payment of £100,000. In breach of contract, the claimant refused to accept delivery, and the court held that he was able to recover the part payment from the defendants, even though this was subject to the defendants' right to recover damages for breach of contract. In reviewing the decision some 40 years later, the House of Lords, in Hyundai Shipbuilding and Heavy Industries Co Ltd v Papadopulos [1980] 1 WLR 1129, stated that in Dies the defendants, who had to return the part payment, [...]. However, had they incurred expenditure, their Lordships suggested that the party in breach may not be able to recover the part payment.
Answer
had not incurred expenditure performing their contractual obligations


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
ach of contract. In reviewing the decision some 40 years later, the House of Lords, in Hyundai Shipbuilding and Heavy Industries Co Ltd v Papadopulos [1980] 1 WLR 1129, stated that in Dies the defendants, who had to return the part payment, <span>had not incurred expenditure performing their contractual obligations. However, had they incurred expenditure, their Lordships suggested that the party in breach may not be able to recover the part payment.<span><body><html>

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372565933324

Tags
#contract #law #remedies
Question
In relation to a part payment, on the other hand, the general rule is that the part payment may be recovered by a party in breach of contract. In Dies v British and International Mining and Finance Co [1939] 1 KB 715, the claimant entered into a contract for the purchase of rifles and ammunition and made a part payment of £100,000. In breach of contract, the claimant refused to accept delivery, and the court held that he was able to recover the part payment from the defendants, even though this was subject to the defendants' right to recover damages for breach of contract. In reviewing the decision some 40 years later, the House of Lords, in [ case ], stated that in Dies the defendants, who had to return the part payment, had not incurred expenditure performing their contractual obligations. However, had they incurred expenditure, their Lordships suggested that the party in breach may not be able to recover the part payment.
Answer
Hyundai Shipbuilding and Heavy Industries Co Ltd v Papadopulos [1980] 1 WLR 1129


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
t held that he was able to recover the part payment from the defendants, even though this was subject to the defendants' right to recover damages for breach of contract. In reviewing the decision some 40 years later, the House of Lords, in <span>Hyundai Shipbuilding and Heavy Industries Co Ltd v Papadopulos [1980] 1 WLR 1129, stated that in Dies the defendants, who had to return the part payment, had not incurred expenditure performing their contractual obligations. However, had they incurred expenditure,

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372567768332

Tags
#contract #law #remedies
Question
In relation to a part payment, on the other hand, the general rule is that the part payment may be recovered by a party in breach of contract. In Dies v British and International Mining and Finance Co [1939] 1 KB 715, the claimant entered into a contract for the purchase of rifles and ammunition and made a part payment of £100,000. In breach of contract, the claimant refused to accept delivery, and the court held that he was able to recover the part payment from the defendants, even though this was subject to the defendants' right to recover damages for breach of contract. In reviewing the decision some 40 years later, the House of Lords, in Hyundai Shipbuilding and Heavy Industries Co Ltd v Papadopulos [1980] 1 WLR 1129, stated that in Dies the defendants, who had to return the part payment, had not incurred expenditure performing their contractual obligations. However, [...].
Answer
had they incurred expenditure, their Lordships suggested that the party in breach may not be able to recover the part payment


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
s, in Hyundai Shipbuilding and Heavy Industries Co Ltd v Papadopulos [1980] 1 WLR 1129, stated that in Dies the defendants, who had to return the part payment, had not incurred expenditure performing their contractual obligations. However, <span>had they incurred expenditure, their Lordships suggested that the party in breach may not be able to recover the part payment.<span><body><html>

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372603944204

Tags
#contract #law #remedies
Question
As a matter of law, a deposit is [...], even if the payee has not suffered any loss as a result of the breach.
Answer
not normally recoverable


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
As a matter of law, a deposit is not normally recoverable, even if the payee has not suffered any loss as a result of the breach.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372604992780

Tags
#contract #law #remedies
Question
As a matter of law, a deposit is not normally recoverable, even if [...].
Answer
the payee has not suffered any loss as a result of the breach


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
As a matter of law, a deposit is not normally recoverable, even if the payee has not suffered any loss as a result of the breach.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372606041356

Tags
#contract #law #remedies
Question
As a matter of law, a deposit is not normally recoverable, even if the payee has not suffered any loss as a result of the breach. However, in [ case ], the Privy Council imposed a limitation on this general rule. The general rule only applies if the deposit was given in earnest of performance. A deposit of 25 per cent had been demanded when the prevailing local rate was 10 per cent. The Privy Council advised that the deposit should be repaid subject to a set-off for any loss actually sustained. The court will not re-write the contract by inserting a reasonable figure and allowing the payee to retain the sum. So, the courts are willing to regulate contracts which specify unreasonable deposits.
Answer
Workers Trust and Merchant Bank Ltd v Dojap Investments Ltd [1993] AC 573


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
As a matter of law, a deposit is not normally recoverable, even if the payee has not suffered any loss as a result of the breach. However, in Workers Trust and Merchant Bank Ltd v Dojap Investments Ltd [1993] AC 573, the Privy Council imposed a limitation on this general rule. The general rule only applies if the deposit was given in earnest of performance. A deposit of 25 per cent had been deman

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372607876364

Tags
#contract #law #remedies
Question
As a matter of law, a deposit is not normally recoverable, even if the payee has not suffered any loss as a result of the breach. However, in Workers Trust and Merchant Bank Ltd v Dojap Investments Ltd [1993] AC 573, the [ court ] imposed a limitation on this general rule. The general rule only applies if the deposit was given in earnest of performance. A deposit of 25 per cent had been demanded when the prevailing local rate was 10 per cent. The Privy Council advised that the deposit should be repaid subject to a set-off for any loss actually sustained. The court will not re-write the contract by inserting a reasonable figure and allowing the payee to retain the sum. So, the courts are willing to regulate contracts which specify unreasonable deposits.
Answer
Privy Council


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
d>As a matter of law, a deposit is not normally recoverable, even if the payee has not suffered any loss as a result of the breach. However, in Workers Trust and Merchant Bank Ltd v Dojap Investments Ltd [1993] AC 573, the Privy Council imposed a limitation on this general rule. The general rule only applies if the deposit was given in earnest of performance. A deposit of 25 per cent had been demanded when the prevail

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372609711372

Tags
#contract #law #remedies
Question
As a matter of law, a deposit is not normally recoverable, even if the payee has not suffered any loss as a result of the breach. However, in Workers Trust and Merchant Bank Ltd v Dojap Investments Ltd [1993] AC 573, the Privy Council imposed a limitation on this general rule. The general rule only applies if [...]. A deposit of 25 per cent had been demanded when the prevailing local rate was 10 per cent. The Privy Council advised that the deposit should be repaid subject to a set-off for any loss actually sustained. The court will not re-write the contract by inserting a reasonable figure and allowing the payee to retain the sum. So, the courts are willing to regulate contracts which specify unreasonable deposits.
Answer
the deposit was given in earnest of performance


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
payee has not suffered any loss as a result of the breach. However, in Workers Trust and Merchant Bank Ltd v Dojap Investments Ltd [1993] AC 573, the Privy Council imposed a limitation on this general rule. The general rule only applies if <span>the deposit was given in earnest of performance. A deposit of 25 per cent had been demanded when the prevailing local rate was 10 per cent. The Privy Council advised that the deposit should be repaid subject to a set-off for any lo

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372610759948

Tags
#contract #law #remedies
Question
A deposit of 25 per cent had been demanded when the prevailing local rate was 10 per cent. The Privy Council advised that the deposit should be repaid subject to a set-off for any loss actually sustained. The court will not re-write the contract by inserting a reasonable figure and allowing the payee to retain the sum. So, the courts are willing to regulate contracts which specify unreasonable deposits.
Answer
Workers Trust and Merchant Bank Ltd v Dojap Investments Ltd [1993] AC 573


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
As a matter of law, a deposit is not normally recoverable, even if the payee has not suffered any loss as a result of the breach. However, in Workers Trust and Merchant Bank Ltd v Dojap Investments Ltd [1993] AC 573, the Privy Council imposed a limitation on this general rule. The general rule only applies if the deposit was given in earnest of performance. A deposit of 25 per cent had been deman

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372613643532

Tags
#contract #law #remedies
Question
Where, under a contract of sale, the buyer wrongfully neglects, or refuses to pay for, the goods according to the terms of the contract, the seller may maintain an action against him for the price of the goods:
Answer
Sale of Goods Act 1979 s 49.


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Where, under a contract of sale, the buyer wrongfully neglects, or refuses to pay for, the goods according to the terms of the contract, the seller may maintain an action against him for the price of the goods: Sale of Goods Act 1979 s 49.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372615478540

Tags
#contract #law #remedies
Question
Where, under a contract of sale, the buyer wrongfully neglects, or refuses to pay for, the goods according to the terms of the contract, the seller may [...]: Sale of Goods Act 1979 s 49.
Answer
maintain an action against him for the price of the goods


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Where, under a contract of sale, the buyer wrongfully neglects, or refuses to pay for, the goods according to the terms of the contract, the seller may maintain an action against him for the price of the goods: Sale of Goods Act 1979 s 49.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372616527116

Tags
#contract #law #remedies
Question
Where, under a contract of sale, [...], the seller may maintain an action against him for the price of the goods: Sale of Goods Act 1979 s 49.
Answer
the buyer wrongfully neglects, or refuses to pay for, the goods according to the terms of the contract


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Where, under a contract of sale, the buyer wrongfully neglects, or refuses to pay for, the goods according to the terms of the contract, the seller may maintain an action against him for the price of the goods: Sale of Goods Act 1979 s 49.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372617837836

Tags
#contract #law #remedies
Question
Where, under a contract of sale, the buyer wrongfully neglects, or refuses to pay for, the goods according to the terms of the contract, the seller may maintain an action against him for the price of the goods: Sale of Goods Act 1979 s 49. Where the price is ascertainable in a manner provided in the [ statute ], the appropriate claim is a liquidated demand: the remedy is the award of the liquidated sum. But where the price is not determined in accordance with s 8, the buyer must pay a reasonable price. What is a reasonable price is a question of fact dependent on the circumstances of each particular case: s 8. The action for a reasonable price for goods is a claim for an unliquidated sum.
Answer
Sale of Goods Act 1979 s 8


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

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
s, or refuses to pay for, the goods according to the terms of the contract, the seller may maintain an action against him for the price of the goods: Sale of Goods Act 1979 s 49. Where the price is ascertainable in a manner provided in the <span>Sale of Goods Act 1979 s 8, the appropriate claim is a liquidated demand: the remedy is the award of the liquidated sum. But where the price is not determined in accordance with s 8, the buyer must pay a reason

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1372619672844

Tags
#contract #law #remedies
Question
Where, under a contract of sale, the buyer wrongfully neglects, or refuses to pay for, the goods according to the terms of the contract, the seller may maintain an action against him for the price of the goods: Sale of Goods Act 1979 s 49. [...] in a manner provided in the Sale of Goods Act 1979 s 8, the appropriate claim is a liquidated demand: the remedy is the award of the liquidated sum. But where the price is not determined in accordance with s 8, the buyer must pay a reasonable price. What is a reasonable price is a question of fact dependent on the circumstances of each particular case: s 8. The action for a reasonable price for goods is a claim for an unliquidated sum.
Answer
Where the price is ascertainable