Liability for Negligence and Occupiers' Liability

0
Law of Obligations

1
Issue
The issue is whether John is liable for negligence due to his failure to leave the wet towel on
the stair? Whether he can eliminate his liability by providing that Marco should not have
gone into the bedroom?
Rule
In order to given advice to John, the elements of negligence and occupiers’ liability will be
evaluated. Negligence is referred as the failure of maintaining a standard of care which is
expected from a person while acting in a specific position. Donoghue v Stevenson1 is a
leading judgement in which the elements of negligence were established. There must be a
duty of care which can be established based on the neighbour test given in this case. As per
this case, duty is established based on proximity relationship and reasonable foresight of the
risk. The person who owes the duty must take or failed to take certain actions which
resulted in violation of the duty.2 The court used an objective test while determining
whether the duty is breached or not in the case of Vaughan v Menlove.3 The objective test
determines whether a standard is maintained by the person that can be expected from a
reasonable person. The injury suffered by the party must be the result of the defendant’s
negligent actions. In the judgement of Barnett v Chelsea & Kensington Hospital4, it was ruled
that element of causation must be established to prove negligence which can be established
through ‘but for’ test. As per this test, the injury suffered by the party would not have
occurred, but for the failure of the defendant to maintain a standard of care, the injury was
suffered by the plaintiff.5 Lastly, the injury or damages suffered by a person as a result of
negligent actions of another party must not be too remote — the ruling of The Wagon
Mound no 16 assists in understanding this element. The damages which are too remote or
not foreseeable cannot be recovered under the suit of negligence.
On the other hand, occupiers’ liability is referred as the duty which is owed by landowners
towards those individuals who comes onto their land. In the judgement of Wheat v E Lacon
1 (1932) AC 532
2 Graham Stephenson, Sourcebook on Tort Law 2/e (Routledge 2012).
3 (1837) 3 Bing N.C. 467
4 [1969] 1 QB 428
5 Jonathan Herring, Q&A Medical Law (Routledge 2015).
6 [1961] AC 388