Jones v Livox Quarries Ltd

JurisdictionEngland & Wales
Judgment Date1952
CourtCourt of Appeal
    • This document is available in original version only for vLex customers

      View this document and try vLex for 7 days
    • TRY VLEX
198 cases
  • Tan Chee Yim and Another; Yaw Kee
    • Singapore
    • Court of Appeal (Singapore)
    • Invalid date
  • Drage v Smith
    • United Kingdom
    • Queen's Bench Division
    • Invalid date
  • Westwood v Post Office
    • United Kingdom
    • Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
    • 23 November 1972
    ...there. It is no answer for him to say that the danger he met was not one which either he or the Post Office had expected. Thus, in Jones v. Livox Quarries Ltd. (1952 2 Queen's Bench 608) this Court had to consider whether a workman who was riding onthe towbar of a tracked vehicle in disobed......
  • O'Connell v Jackson
    • United Kingdom
    • Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
    • 7 July 1971
    ...responsibility for the damage". 6 The first question, accordingly, is whether this plaintiff was guilty of contributory negligence. In Jones v. Livox (1952 2 Queen's Bench 608) Lord Justice Denning, as he then was, said, "Just as actionable negligence requires the foreseeability of harm to ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
2 books & journal articles
  • A social security perspective of employees’ compensation law in Nigeria
    • South Africa
    • Journal of Corporate Commercial Law & Practice No. , November 2022
    • 9 November 2022
    ...risks.11 Stapley v Gypsum Mines Ltd (1953) AC 663; Carr v Mercantile Produce Co Ltd (1949) 2 KB 601. In Jones v Livox Quarries Ltd (1952) 1 TLR 1377 at 1383, Denning, L J stated: ‘Although contributory negligence does not depend on a duty of care, it does depend on foreseeability. Just as a......
  • Tort Law
    • Singapore
    • Singapore Academy of Law Annual Review No. 2002, December 2002
    • 1 December 2002 the deceased”s favour, the deceased was nonetheless liable in contributory negligence. Applying the case of Jones v Livox Quarries Ltd[1952] 2 QB 608 at 615, the court held that the “deceased must take into account the carelessness of others”, and that a “reasonable motorcyclist in the p......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT