2022Unpublished venueRequires access

Negligence

Gilbert Kodilinye, Natalie Corthésy

Open publisher page 0 citations

Abstract

This chapter is concerned with the general principles of the tort of negligence. The three main elements of the tort, viz, (i) duty of care, (ii) breach of duty and (iii) causation, are discussed in turn, with emphasis on Caribbean and English case law. Under ‘duty of care’, the Donoghue v Stevenson , Anns v Merton and Caparo v Dickman tests are compared. Under ‘breach of duty’, instances of the application of the ‘reasonable man’ test are examined, followed by an account of the principle res ipsa loquitur, relating to proof of negligence. Causation is then examined in two sections, the first addressing causation in fact, the second focusing on remoteness of damage, including such concepts as the ‘egg-shell skull’ principle, and novus actus interveniens. The chapter concludes with an examination of two special areas of negligence: (i) liability for negligent misstatements and other cases of economic loss and (ii) liability for psychiatric injury (‘nervous shock’).

About this research paper

What this paper is about

This chapter is concerned with the general principles of the tort of negligence. The three main elements of the tort, viz, (i) duty of care, (ii) breach of duty and (iii) causation, are discussed in turn, with emphasis on Caribbean and English case law. Under ‘duty of care’, the Donoghue v Stevenson , Anns v Merton and Caparo v Dickman tests are compared. Under ‘breach of duty’, instances of the application of the ‘reasonable man’ test are examined, followed by an account of the principle res ipsa loquitur, relating to proof of negligence. Causation is then examined in two sections, the first addressing causation in fact, the second focusing on remoteness of damage, including such concepts as the ‘egg-shell skull’ principle, and novus actus interveniens. The chapter concludes with an examination of two special areas of negligence: (i) liability for negligent misstatements and other cases of economic loss and (ii) liability for psychiatric injury (‘nervous shock’).

Why it matters

A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

This chapter is concerned with the general principles of the tort of negligence. The three main elements of the tort, viz, (i) duty of care, (ii) breach of duty and (iii) causation, are discussed in turn, with emphasis on Caribbean and English case law. Under ‘duty of care’, the Donoghue v Stevenson , Anns v Merton and Caparo v Dickman tests are compared. Under ‘breach of duty’, instances of the application of the ‘reasonable man’ test are examined, followed by an account of the principle res ipsa loquitur, relating to proof of negligence. Causation is then examined in two sections, the first addressing causation in fact, the second focusing on remoteness of damage, including such concepts as the ‘egg-shell skull’ principle, and novus actus interveniens. The chapter concludes with an examination of two special areas of negligence: (i) liability for negligent misstatements and other cases of economic loss and (ii) liability for psychiatric injury (‘nervous shock’).

Key concepts: Philosophy

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Negligence — Research Paper | ScholarLens