How should the law deter all forms of careless behaviour?

When should one person bear legal responsibility for another’s harm?

Who should be punished for causing loss or harm?

Whether society can afford universal insurance coverage.

How can victims always receive full compensation?

The defendant was liable because the reasonable person does not set themselves alight. 

The defendant was not liable because his actions were involuntary and therefore not negligent. 

The defendant was liable because he directly caused physical harm to the claimant by his positive act. 

The defendant was not liable because he owed no duty of care while acting under a delusion. 

The defendant was not liable because the harm was caused by the claimant's own intervention. 

The doctor was negligent because she failed to obtain the patient's consent to all available options. 

The doctor was negligent because she failed to disclose a material risk that a reasonable patient would want to know. 

The doctor breached her duty by failing to mention the alternative treatment, even those she judged unsuitable. 

The doctor's decision about which treatments to offer is a matter of professional judgement assessed by reference to accepted medical practice. 

The doctor was not negligent because patients have no legal right to be told about medical alternatives. 

The claim failed because Mr. Tindall was a "rescuer", and the police owed no duty to rescuers. 

The police acted irrationally in failing to grit the road. 

The police had sufficient control over the patch of ice to give rise to a duty. 

There was no communication that could trigger an assumption of responsibility. 

The police created a new hazard by attending and then leaving the scene. 

Butterfield v Forrester (1809) 

Baker v Quantum Clothing Group (2011)

Indermaur v Dames (1866)

Wilson & Clyde Co Ltd v English (1938) 

Danley v Croydon Health Services NHS Trust (2018)

The driver cannot be negligent because intention and negligence are mutually exclusive mental states. 

There can be no negligence because the driver acted intentionally rather than carelessly. 

The driver is liable in negligence because they intentionally endangered the pedestrian.

The driver is liable in negligence only if he intended to cause that specific injury. 

The driver's motive to "teach her a lesson" prevents liability in negligence but would be relevant to a criminal charge. 

Because it replaces the but-for test with a general rule that causation is proved whenever risk is increased.

Because it removes the need for any causal link between breach and harm. 

Because it only applies to industrial disease claims.

Because it allows recovery where the defendant's breach is shown to be a possible rather than a probable cause of the harm. 

Because was recognised purely on the grounds of fairness.

When the defendant was under a legal duty to act but failed to do so.

When the harm would have occurred even if the defendant had not been there. 

When the claimant relied on the defendant to act, and they failed to do so. 

When the defendant failed to exercise reasonable care in an emergency.

When the defendant's inaction was morally blameworthy. 

The seriousness of potential harm, the defendant's financial position, and whether the defendant owed a moral as well as a legal duty to the claimant. 

The foreseeability of harm, the claimant's age and occupation, and whether insurance is available. 

The likelihood of injury, the seriousness of potential harm, the social value of the activity creating the risk, and the cost of preventing it. 

The likelihood of injury, the claimant's conduct, and whether the defendant's actions were in accordance with public opinion. 

The likelihood and seriousness of injury, the defendant's motive, and whether the defendant apologised afterwards. 

Murphy v Brentwood DC [1991] 1 AC 398

Hinz v Berry [1970] 2 QB 40

Rothwell v Chemical & Insulating Co Ltd [2007] UKHL 39

Bolton v Stone [1951] AC 850

Parkinson v St James and Seacroft University Hospital NHS Trust [2001] 3 All ER 97