Category Archives: Negligence

Nanci Carr, ‘Raising Corporate Consciousness of Employer Liability for Video Zoom While Driving’

ABSTRACT Imagine that you have logged onto a video Zoom meeting, and you notice that one of the participants is driving. He fumbles with the phone, trying to align the camera with his face, looking from the phone to the road ahead. Other participants on the call either say nothing or thank him for being […]

Auckland and Goold, ‘Offsetting damages in wrongful conception and birth cases: a way through the post-McFarlane mire’

“‘You can offset apples against apples, and pears against pears, but not apples against pears’ (Lord Toulson, Lee v Taunton and Somerset NHS Trust). The House of Lords’ refusal to award damages for the cost of raising children born as a result of negligence has rightly been subject to substantial criticism. Much of this has […]

Kumaralingam Amirthalingam, ‘Clinical negligence and relational psychiatric injury’

“In delivering his opinion in Donoghue v Stevenson [1932] AC 562; [1932] All ER Reports 1, Lord Atkin used the neighbour principle as a metaphor to explain existing case law; it was not intended as a heuristic device for judicial expansion of the law of negligence. A legal neighbour is someone ‘so closely and directly […]

David Howarth, ‘Six Questions in Search of a Tort: Has The Supreme Court Transformed Negligence?’

“A persistent question in the tort of negligence is whether defendants who have breached their duty of care should be held responsible for every aspect of the difference between the claimant’s position before and after the breach. The law supposedly offers restitutio in integrum – restoring claimants so far as achievable through money to where […]

Chang Wen Yee and Joel Soon, ‘Doomed to die? Causation in medical negligence’

“When lawyers research and prepare for trial, it is often tempting to search for and select favourable statistical evidence in support of their arguments. However, the Singapore Court of Appeal decision in Foo Chee Boon Edward v Seto Wei Ming (Seto) serves as an important reminder that courts would not be persuaded by mere dint […]

Helen Evans, ‘Professional negligence in 2021: the year in review’

“The most high-profile case of the year was the Supreme Court’s judgment in Manchester Building Society v Grant Thornton, [2021] UKSC 20, [2021] 3 WLR 81. That case returned to a perennial problem that often emerges in professional negligence cases, namely, the extent to which a defendant should be held liable for the consequences of […]

Neil Partington, ‘Negligence in sport: context vs principle’

“It has been suggested that ‘[i]n law context is everything’. This observation by Lord Steyn has particular resonance in the burgeoning area of sports negligence given the wide and varied circumstances of sporting activities, with Judge LJ in a leading authority in this field reaffirming that ‘the issue of negligence cannot be resolved in a […]

Ronan Condon, ‘Closing the sluice gates: UCC v ESB and the worrying narrowing duty of care analysis’

“In 1957, Robert Heuston measuring the post-war development of tort law remarked that the neighbour principle had been made to ‘bear a weight so manifestly greater than it could support’. The weight that Lord Atkin’s general duty of care has to bear, of course, is to define the basis and extent of the duty of […]

Price, Gerke and Cohen, ‘Liability for Use of Artificial Intelligence in Medicine’

ABSTRACT While artificial intelligence has substantial potential to improve medical practice, errors will certainly occur, sometimes resulting in injury. Who will be liable? Questions of liability for AI-related injury raise not only immediate concerns for potentially liable parties, but also broader systemic questions about how AI will be developed and adopted. The landscape of liability […]

‘New study in California concludes what we knew already: caps on damages in malpractice cases does not reduce malpractice’

“As California seeks to pass new legislation that would increase the amount victims can recover for pain and suffering in medical malpractice lawsuits, a new study shows that setting damage caps for pain and suffering reduces the incentive to avoid malpractice, and results in an increased rate of malpractice lawsuits. And, an increased rate of […]