Can Sophie Sue Michael for Negligence?

Business Law Assignment

Answer
Issue
Whether Sophie can file a suit of negligence against Michael to hold him liable for his
actions?
Rule
Based on the principles of negligence, a person can be held liable to pay compensation for
his/her negligent actions. The law provides that if an individual breaches his/her duty of
care which caused an injury to another party can be held liable for negligence. In Donoghue
v Stevenson (1932) AC 562 case, the court provided a judgement based on the principle of
negligence. In this case, the claimant ordered a drink in a café; due to the negligence of the
café owner, the drink contained the remains of a dead snail. Due to drinking the remains of
the dead snail, the claimant became ill and suffered a personal injury. A suit for negligence
filed against the café owner. The court provided that the defendant is liable to pay damages
under the tort of negligence because the duty was violated by him to maintain a standard of
care which he owed towards the customers (Barker et al., 2012). The court also established
key elements which are necessary to be present while filing a suit for negligence. The first
element is that the party must have a legal duty to care. Without a duty of care, the suit for
negligence cannot be filed.
To determine whether to hold a person guilty in negligence suit, the court uses ‘Caparo test’
which was established in the case of Caparo Industries PLC v Dickman (1990) 2 AC 605. The
court provided that the parties must have a proximity relationship based on which parties
has to ensure a standard of care. The second element is that the duty must be breached by
the party against whom the suit for negligence is filed. The objective test is used by the
court to assess whether appropriate care is not taken by the party which was established in
Vaughan v Menlove (1837) 3 Bing N.C. 467 case. The test evaluates whether the person had
taken the appropriate standard of care which is expected of him in the particular situation
(Stickley, 2016). Another element is that the damages suffered by the party must be caused
directly due to the actions of the defendant. In Barnett v Chelsea & Kensington Hospital
(1969) 1 QB 428 case, the court established the ‘but for’ test. The test is used for identifying
Page 1