All books in this flagship series contain carefully selected substantial extracts from key cases, legislation, and academic debate, providing able students with a stand-alone resource. This Chapter introduces the notion of the ‘duty of care’ in negligence, and tracks its emergence and development through a series of important cases, including analysis of the Supreme Court’s most recent analysis of the duty of care. It explores the issues relating to liability, principle and policy, incremental development and the Caparo test, and incrementalism and established principle. The chapter concludes with consideration of the special case of omissions and positive duties to act.
Chapter
4. The Duty of Care: Introduction and Development
Chapter
Iqbal v Prison Officers Association [2010] QB 732
Essential Cases: Tort Law provides a bridge between course textbooks and key case judgments. This case document summarizes the facts and decision in Iqbal v Prison Officers Association [2010] QB 732. The document also included supporting commentary from author Craig Purshouse.
Chapter
Poole Borough Council v GN [2019] UKSC 25
Essential Cases: Tort Law provides a bridge between course textbooks and key case judgments. This case document summarizes the facts and decision in Poole Borough Council v GN [2019] UKSC 25. The document also included supporting commentary from author Craig Purshouse.
Chapter
R v Miller [1983] 2 AC 161, House of Lords
Essential Cases: Criminal Law provides a bridge between course textbooks and key case judgments. This case document summarizes the facts and decision in R v Miller [1983] 2 AC 161, House of Lords. The document also included supporting commentary from author Jonathan Herring.
Chapter
3. Duty of care
Further issues
This chapter discusses areas in which the existence of a duty of care is problematic, particularly raising policy reasons for not imposing negligence liability in certain situations. Duty of care is often absent in the case of omissions, that is, when damage resulted from the defendant’s lack of action, rather than directly from a positive act. When the defendant is a public body, concern about operational discretion and financial implications may make it undesirable to impose a duty of care. There is a focus on negligence claims against the police. Duties to the unborn child are included.
Chapter
4. Omissions
This chapter considers the question of whether, and if so, how, the criminal law should impose liability for omissions. It discusses the courts’ approach to the imposition of liability for omissions and presents cases to demonstrate the difficulty of distinguishing between acts and omissions. It also addresses the link between omissions and causation.
Chapter
3. Duty of care
Further issues
This chapter discusses areas in which the existence of a duty of care is problematic, particularly raising policy reasons for not imposing negligence liability in certain situations. Duty of care is often absent in the case of omissions, that is, when damage resulted from the defendant’s lack of action, rather than directly from a positive act. When the defendant is a public body, concern about operational discretion and financial implications may make it undesirable to impose a duty of care. There is a focus on negligence claims against the police. Duties to the unborn child are included.
Chapter
2. The elements of a crime: actus reus
To begin, the chapter explores the key elements of criminal offences. Two factors are crucial: the event, behaviour, or state of affairs known as the external element or actus reus; and the state of mind known as the mental element or mens rea. This chapter discusses: the principle of actus reus, proof and the elements of the offence, how to identify elements of actus reus and mens rea, the effect of penalty provisions in determining the elements of the actus reus, actus reus and justification or excuse, the problematic case of Dadson with regard to actus reus, physical involuntariness, and a ‘state of affairs’ as an actus reus. Further, it reviews general liability for omissions and offences of mere omission. Finally, it analyses causation: ie the ‘but for’ principle, the connection between fault and result, negligible causes, and intervening acts.
Chapter
9. Negligence: Duty of Care—Omissions and Acts of Third Parties
Donal Nolan and Ken Oliphant
This chapter examines liability for omissions and for the acts of a third party in negligence. Despite the general principle excluding liability for omissions, liability may arise in certain exceptional circumstances, but no precise categorisation is possible of the various situations in which a duty of affirmative action is recognised. The question of liability for the acts of a third party often overlaps with the question of liability for omissions because in a third-party case the complaint is often of an omission, for example a failure to control a third party, or to prevent a dangerous situation from being sparked off by a third party. But not all third-party cases involve omissions. Sometimes the complaint is simply that the defendant provided the third party with the opportunity or the means to injure the claimant, and it is that conduct which is alleged to be negligent, regardless of whether the defendant unreasonably failed at some subsequent point of time to intervene to prevent the injury. In this chapter, analysis of these issues is book-ended by sections addressing the distinction between acts and omissions, and the reasons for treating the latter differently from the former (I), and the specific question of nonfeasance by public bodies (IV).
Chapter
2. Actus reus: the conduct element
A crime consists of conduct (actus reus or AR) and a mental element (mens rea or MR). This chapter focuses on AR, the external elements of a criminal offence. It discusses the key components of AR. These key components are omissions or liability for failing to act and causation, which represents the connection between the conduct and the result of an act. The duty of a doctor in withdrawal of medical treatment is discussed. The chapter explains that AR must be proved, must be voluntary, and can include a mental element. It also considers several examples of cases relevant to AR and analyses the bases of the court decisions.
Book
Kirsty Horsey and Erika Rackley
Tort Law encourages the reader to understand, engage with and critically reflect upon tort law. The book first discusses the tort of negligence, looking at the basic principles of the duty of care and at special duty problems relating to omissions and acts of third parties, psychiatric harm, public bodies and economic loss. It also covers breach, causation and remoteness and defences to negligence. The book then considers occupiers’, product and employers’ liability and breach of statutory duty before moving on to look at personal torts and explaining trespass to the person, defamation and the invasion of privacy. It next discusses land torts and and finally looks at liability (including vicarious liability), damages and limitations.
Chapter
2. Negligence I: Duty of Care
Dr Karen Dyer and Dr Anil Balan
Each Concentrate revision guide is packed with essential information, key cases, revision tips, exam Q&As, and more. Concentrates show you what to expect in a law exam, what examiners are looking for, and how to achieve extra marks. This chapter discusses negligence in terms of duty of care. In order to answer questions on this topic, students need to have the following: a general understanding of the tort of negligence; an understanding of the development of duty of care in negligence, in particular the key cases of Donoghue v Stevenson [1932] AC 562; Anns v Merton LBC [1978] AC 728; Caparo plc v Dickman [1990] 2 AC 605; an understanding of the development of duty of care in specialized aspects of negligence; and understanding of liability for omissions and of public authorities.
Chapter
2. Negligence: duty of care
Without assuming prior legal knowledge, books in the Directions series introduce and guide readers through key points of law and legal debate. Questions, diagrams, and exercises help readers engage fully with each subject and check their understanding as they progress. Negligence is a tort in its own right and involves an unintentional wrong, as opposed to trespass, which involves an intentional wrong. It has three main elements: duty of care (whether the defendant owes the claimant a duty of care), breach (whether the defendant has breached that duty), and damage (whether that breach has caused damage of a legally recognized kind to the claimant). Duty of care is determined by proximity, foreseeability, and policy and is most likely to be established in cases of positive acts which cause physical injury or property damage. This chapter provides an overview of the history of negligence and discusses the function of duty of care in negligence. It also considers the way duty of care has been defined and developed and applies the principles of duty of care in the areas of omissions and liability of public bodies.
Chapter
2. Actus Reus: The Conduct Element
The actus reus is a central aspect of criminal law that defines the harm done to the victim and the wrong performed by the defendant. In many cases this involves proof that the defendant caused a particular result. A defendant will be held to have caused a result if but for their actions the result would not have occurred and there has been no intervening act of a third party. This chapter begins by distinguishing the component elements of a crime. It then discusses the voluntary act ‘requirement’; causation; classification of offences; the need for a voluntary act; omissions; and seeking a coherent approach to causation.
Chapter
2. Actus reus
Michael J. Allen and Ian Edwards
Course-focused and comprehensive, the Textbook on series provides an accessible overview of the key areas on the law curriculum. This chapter explains the concept of actus reus. It discusses the elements of crime, defining an actus reus, proving an actus reus, that conduct must be voluntary, state of affairs offences, omissions liability (situations in which a person will be liable for failing to act), causation (including the principles of factual and legal causation), and coincidence in time of actus reus and mens rea. A Law in Context feature analyses critically English law’s approach to liability for causing another person’s suicide.
Chapter
2. The elements of a crime: actus reus
David Ormerod and Karl Laird
The chapter begins the exploration of the elements of criminal offences. Two factors are crucial: the event, behaviour or state of affairs known as the external element or actus reus, and the state of mind known as the mental element or mens rea. This chapter discusses the principle of actus reus, proof and the elements of the offence, how to identify elements of actus reus and mens rea, coincidence of actus reus and mens rea, the effect of penalty provisions in determining the elements of the actus reus, actus reus and justification or excuse, the problematic case of Dadson with regard to actus reus, physical involuntariness, a ‘state of affairs’ as an actus reus, general liability for omissions, offences of mere omission, causation, the ‘but for’ principle, the connection between fault and result and negligible causes.
Chapter
2. Actus reus
Michael J. Allen and Ian Edwards
Course-focused and contextual, Criminal Law provides a succinct overview of the key areas on the law curriculum balanced with thought-provoking contextual discussion. This chapter explains the concept of actus reus. It discusses the elements of crime, defining an actus reus, proving an actus reus, that conduct must be voluntary, state of affairs offences, omissions liability (situations in which a person will be liable for failing to act), causation (including the principles of factual and legal causation), and coincidence in time of actus reus and mens rea. ‘The law in context’ feature analyses critically English law’s approach to liability for causing another person’s suicide.
Chapter
2. Actus Reus: The Conduct Element
The actus reus is a central aspect of criminal law that defines the harm done to the victim and the wrong performed by the defendant. In many cases this involves proof that the defendant caused a particular result. A defendant will be held to have caused a result if but for their actions the result would not have occurred and there has been no intervening act of a third party. This chapter begins by distinguishing the component elements of a crime. It then discusses the voluntary act ‘requirement’; causation; classification of offences; the need for a voluntary act; omissions; and seeking a coherent approach to causation.
Chapter
2. Negligence: duty of care
Without assuming prior legal knowledge, books in the Directions series introduce and guide readers through key points of law and legal debate. Questions, diagrams, and exercises help readers to engage fully with each subject and check their understanding as they progress. Negligence is a tort in its own right and involves an unintentional wrong as opposed to trespass which involves an intentional wrong. It has three main elements: duty of care (whether the defendant owes the claimant a duty of care), breach (whether the defendant has breached that duty), and damage (whether that breach has caused damage of a legally recognized kind to the claimant). Duty of care is determined by proximity, foreseeability, and policy and is most likely to be established in cases of positive acts which cause physical injury or property damage. This chapter provides an overview of the history of negligence and discusses the function of duty of care in negligence. It also considers the way duty of care has been defined and developed and applies the principles of duty of care in the areas of omissions and liability of public bodies.
