Tort Law Flashcards

Which test does an English court apply to determine whether a defendant's breach of duty in negligence has caused psychiatric injury to a 'secondary victim'?

Answer: The claimant must satisfy the Alcock control mechanisms: proximity in time/space, perception through unaided senses, and close tie of love and affection

Alcock v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire [1992] established that secondary victims must prove: a close tie of love and affection, proximity to the accident or its immediate aftermath, and perception through their own unaided senses.

Under the rule in Donoghue v Stevenson [1932], what principle was established by the House of Lords?

Answer: A manufacturer owes a duty of care to the ultimate consumer where the product reaches them without a reasonable possibility of intermediate examination

Donoghue v Stevenson established that a manufacturer owes a duty to the ultimate consumer where there is no reasonable possibility of intermediate examination, founding modern negligence law.

A claimant partially contributed to their own injury. Under the Law Reform (Contributory Negligence) Act 1945, what is the effect on the claimant's damages?

Answer: Damages are reduced by the proportion the claimant's fault contributed to the damage

The 1945 Act provides that damages shall be reduced to such extent as the court thinks just and equitable having regard to the claimant's share in responsibility for the damage.

In defamation law, which of the following is a defence of 'truth' (formerly justification) under the Defamation Act 2013?

Answer: The defendant must prove on the balance of probabilities that the imputation conveyed by the statement is substantially true

Section 2 of the Defamation Act 2013 provides that the defence of truth requires the defendant to show that the imputation conveyed by the statement complained of is substantially true.

In the tort of trespass to the person, which case confirmed that battery requires a direct and intentional act, not necessarily hostility?

Answer: Wilson v Pringle [1987], though subsequently the requirement for hostility was doubted in Re F (Mental Patient: Sterilisation) [1990]

Wilson v Pringle suggested hostility was required for battery, but Re F (Mental Patient: Sterilisation) cast doubt on this, clarifying that an intentional direct act making contact with another suffices without any need for hostility.

The 'eggshell skull' rule in tort law provides that:

Answer: A defendant must take their victim as they find them and is liable for the full extent of the claimant's injury, even if unforeseeable due to a pre-existing condition

The 'eggshell skull' (or 'thin skull') rule, illustrated in Smith v Leech Brain & Co [1962], requires the defendant to take the claimant as they find them, bearing full liability even if the injury is more severe due to the claimant's pre-existing condition.

Which of the following correctly states when the limitation period for a personal injury claim in negligence generally begins under the Limitation Act 1980?

Answer: Three years from the date of accrual of the cause of action or the date of the claimant's knowledge, whichever is the later

Section 11 of the Limitation Act 1980 provides that personal injury claims must be brought within three years from either the date of accrual or the claimant's date of knowledge (s.14), whichever is later.