Negligence in UK Law
- breach of duty
- breach of duty of care
- breach of statutory duty
- careless driving
- chain of causation
- contributory negligence
- dangerous driving
- dangerous driving causing death
- driving negligence
- duty of care
- duty to rescue
- ex turpi causa
- gross negligence
- medical malpractice
- medical negligence claim
- medical negligence or clinical negligence
- negligence duty of care
- negligence of employer
- negligent misstatement
- neighbour principle
- novus actus interveniens
- police negligence
- professional negligence
- professional negligence in the manner he
- standard of care
- tort of negligence
- volenti non fit injuria
- wrongful arrest
Anns v Merton London Borough Council
First one has to ask whether, as between the alleged wrongdoer and the person who has suffered damage there is a sufficient relationship of proximity or neighbourhood such that, in the reasonable contemplation of the former, carelessness on his part may be likely to cause damage to the latter—in which case a prima facie duty of care arises.
M'Alister or Donoghue (Pauper) v Stevenson
You must take reasonable care to avoid acts or omissions which you can reasonably foresee would be likely to injure your neighbour. The answer seems to be persons who are so closely and directly affected by my act that I ought reasonably to have them in contemplation as being so affected when I am directing my mind to the acts or omissions which are called in question.
Dorset Yacht Company Ltd v Home Office
Donoghue v. Stevenson  A.C. 562 may be regarded as a milestone, and the well-known passage in Lord Atkin's speech should I think be regarded as a statement of principle. It is not to be treated as if it were a statutory definition. But I think that the time has come when we can and should say that it ought to apply unless there is some justification or valid explanation for its exclusion.
Maynard v West Midlands Regional Health Authority
My Lords, even before considering the reasons given by the majority of the Court of Appeal for reversing the findings of negligence, I have to say that a judge's "preference" for one body of distinguished professional opinion to another also professionally distinguished is not sufficient to establish negligence in a practitioner whose actions have received the seal of approval of those whose opinions, truthfully expressed, honestly held.
Hill v Chief Constable of West Yorkshire
In some instances the imposition of liability may lead to the exercise of a function being carried on in a detrimentally defensive frame of mind. A great deal of police time, trouble and expense might be expected to have to be put into the preparation of the defence to the action and the attendance of witnesses at the trial. The result would be a significant diversion of police manpower and attention from their most important function, that of the suppression of crime.
Saif Ali v Sydney Mitchell & Company
No matter what profession it may be, the common law does not impose on those who practise it any liability for damage resulting from what in the result turn out to have been errors of judgment, unless the error was such as no reasonably well-informed and competent member of that profession could have made. So too the common law makes allowance for the difficulties in the circumstances in which professional judgments have to be made and acted upon.
Wilsons and Clyde Coal Company v English
I think the whole course of authority consistently recognises a duty which rests on the employer and which is personal to the employer, to take reasonable care for the safety of his workmen, whether the employer be an individual, a firm or a company and whether or not the employer takes any share in the conduct of the operations.
- Law Reform (Contributory Negligence) Act 1945
- The National Health Service (Clinical Negligence Scheme) (Amendment) Regulations 2014
- The National Health Service (Clinical Negligence Scheme for General Practice) Regulations 2019
- The National Health Service (Clinical Negligence Scheme) (Wales) Regulations 2019
It is rare for an employer to rely on an employee's negligence as a sufficient reason to dismiss. This is particularly the case where there has been a one-off error. Also, it is likely that a more ...
- Help With Medical Negligence Compensation Claims Abroad
- Court Considers Contributory Negligence, Capacity And Consent
Can Gross Negligence Constitute Gross Misconduct?
The Court of Appeal (CA) in Adesokan v Sainsbury's Supermarkets Ltd  EWCA Civ 22 considered whether an employee’s failure to act constituted gross misconduct. Mr Adesokan...