This chapter is the first of two chapters concerned with remedies. The focus of this chapter is monetary remedies; the financial consequences of a proven tort. It begins by discussing the notion of damage, and damages, before exploring different types of damages; the principle of full compensation; the interrelationship of tort and other compensation systems; pecuniary and non-pecuniary losses; death in relation to tort; and damage to property.
Chapter
24. Damages
Chapter
4. Duty of care III: property damage and purely financial loss
This chapter is concerned with duties of care that arise when the claimant suffers either property damage or purely financial loss (that is, loss not attendant on physical damage or on any other primary interest recognised in negligence). Again, we find that duties of care are quite expansive with respect to property damage when the claimant owns or possesses the property in question. By contrast, duties of care are restricted with respect to purely financial losses. The most frequently upheld duties in the latter category cover negligent misstatements and the negligent provision of professional services, the scope of which is dictated by application of the Hedley Byrne v Heller framework or some variant of it.
Chapter
12. Damages
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 the issue of damages, covering key debates, sample questions, diagram answer plan, tips for getting extra marks, and online resources. To answer questions on this topic, students need to understand the following: the primary purpose behind an award of damages; the different types of damages; the three principal types of damage for which a remedy may be available: personal injury (death and psychiatric harm included), property damage, economic loss; and how to calculate an award (in principle).
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
5. Negligence: duty of care problem areas
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. The tort of negligence originated as a remedy for property damage and physical injury. However, recovery of compensation for psychiatric injury and pure economic loss, in cases where they were not caused by physical injury or property damage, has proved difficult. Duty of care for psychiatric injury is contingent upon whether the claimant is a primary or secondary victim. This chapter discusses the policy reasons for limiting duty of care for psychiatric injury, the mechanisms by which the law limits duty of care for psychiatric injury, the meaning of ‘pure economic loss’, and the development of the Hedley Byrne & Co Ltd v Heller & Partners Ltd (1964) principle of liability for negligent statements. The chapter also examines the ‘thin skull’ rule, which applies to psychiatric injury in the same way as to physical injury.
Chapter
2. Negligence
Celebrated for their conceptual clarity, titles in the Clarendon Law Series offer concise, accessible overviews of major fields of law and legal thought. This chapter discusses the tort of negligence. It elaborates on duty of care based on foreseeability, proximity, assumption of responsibility, property damage and personal injury, purely economic harm, psychiatric harm, less serious upset, and liability for omissions. It argues that the common law duty is higher when it requires a person to take active steps to protect others than when it requires only that he refrain from positively causing an injury. But once it is held that a duty exists, its level is always, apparently, the same: it is the duty to take such care as in all the circumstances of the case is reasonable.
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.
Chapter
5. Negligence: duty of care problem areas
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. The tort of negligence originated as a remedy for property damage and physical injury. However, recovery of compensation for psychiatric injury and pure economic loss, in cases where they were not caused by physical injury or property damage, has proved difficult. Duty of care for psychiatric injury is contingent upon whether the claimant is a primary or secondary victim. This chapter discusses the policy reasons for limiting duty of care for psychiatric injury, the mechanisms by which the law limits duty of care for psychiatric injury, the meaning of ‘pure economic loss’, and the development of the Hedley Byrne & Co Ltd v Heller & Partners Ltd (1964) principle of liability for negligent statements. The chapter also examines the ‘thin skull’ rule, which applies to psychiatric injury in the same way as to physical injury.
