Chapter 11 The Tort of Negligence - OED-update - Oxford University ...

Chapter 11 The Tort of Negligence 375
Decision: The defendant was not liable for additional injuries because the claimant had acted
unreasonably, and this constituted a break in the chain of causation.
Where an intervening act breaks the chain of causation, the defendant will only be liable
for injuries that occurred to the claimant prior to that event. The cause of the final loss
suffered by the claimant is that intervening event, which if it is the act of a third party, may
result in the claimant taking action against the third party.
Basic Terminology
Nervous shock A psychiatric illness or condition
such as post-traumatic stress disorder.
Objective test Judging the defendant by the
capabilities of the reasonable person.
Primary victim A person who is under actual
threat of bodily harm or reasonably believes
themselves to be so.
Proximity Legal closeness between the claimant
and the defendant at the time of the cause of
complaint. Legal closeness includes personal
relationships between the parties and length of
time between events.
Pure economic loss Where a claimant’s financial
loss is not connected to his physical injury or
damage to his property.
Res ipsa loquitor (the thing speaks for
itself) The evidence clearly suggests that the
Summary
After studying this chapter students should be able to:
defendant must have breached his duty of care.
(The burden of proof is changed so that the
defendant must show that he was not negligent.)
Secondary victim A person who suffers a
psychiatric illness as a result of witnessing an
accident or its ‘immediate aftermath’.
Strict liability Liability which is imposed on a
person without having to prove that the person
was negligent or at fault.
Subjective test Judging the defendant by his
own capabilities.
Tort A civil wrong for which a remedy, usually
compensation, may be awarded to the wronged
person.
Vicarious liability Liability which arises because
of one person’s relationship with another, such as
employer and employee.
Outline the difference between the Law of Torts and Contract and Criminal Law
• A tort is a civil wrong and is primarily about providing a remedy for people for harm that they have
suffered. The Law of Torts concerns involuntary obligations that are imposed upon persons by the law.
• Criminal Law is primarily about punishing the people who have committed wrongs in the eyes of
the state.
• In the Law of Contract, the obligations imposed in the contract have been voluntarily agreed to by
the parties when they entered into the contract.
For an online
flashcard glossary
scan here
or visit the ORC
For an online
printable version
scan here
or visit the ORC