Learning questions:

1
Learning questions What does a claimant have to
prove in a personal injury case? How are these
necessities reflected in the case of Chittock vs.
Woodbridge School? Starter You remember that
initial judgement in Chittock vs. Woodbridge
school was overturned on appeal. Re-acquaint
yourself with the original case by reading the
article. On a post-it, write down the
implications of this case as described in the
last paragraph. Homework The summary of the
appeal court judgement is available on-line. Its
15 pages long, and you must have read it by
Friday.
2

• What does a claimant have to prove in a personal
  injury case?
• Burden of proof
• Duty of Care Donoghue vs. Stevenson and the
  Caparo 3 part test
• Breach of duty

3
What does a claimant have to prove in a personal
injury case? Donoghue v Stevenson On the
evening of Sunday 26 August 1928, Mary Donoghue,
née MAlister boarded a tram in Glasgow for the
thirty minute journey to Paisley. At around ten
minutes to nine, she and a friend took their
seats in the Wellmeadow Café in the town's
Wellmeadow Place. They were approached by the
café owner, Francis Minghella, and Donoghue's
friend ordered and paid for a pear and ice and an
iced drink. The owner brought the order and
poured part of a bottle of ginger beer into a
tumbler containing ice cream. Donoghue drank some
of the contents and her friend lifted the bottle
to pour the remainder of the ginger beer into the
tumbler. On doing so, it was claimed that the
remains of a snail in a state of decomposition
plopped out of the bottle into the tumbler.
Donoghue later complained of stomach pain, and
her doctor diagnosed her as having
gastroenteritis. She also claimed to have
suffered emotional distress as a result of the
incident.
4
Donoghue v Stevenson and duty of care You must
take reasonable care to avoid acts or omissions
which you can reasonably foresee would be likely
to injure your neighbour. Who, then, in law, is
my neighbour? The answer seems to be persons
who are so closely and directly affected by my
act that I ought reasonably to have them in
contemplation as being so affected when I am
directing my mind to the acts or omissions that
are called in question. Caparo 3 part test
established for duty of care The concept of
reasonable foreseeability of harm The claimant
and the defendant being in a relationship of
proximity It being fair, just and reasonable to
impose liability on the defendant for his
careless actions
5
Breach of Duty Once a duty of care has been
established, it must be shown that a duty has
been breached. The question the courts ask is
whether the behaviour exhibited by the defendant
fell below the threshold of a "reasonable man".
In some cases where the defendant was in a
special profession, e.g. being a doctor, the
court will ask what standard of care a
"reasonable doctor" or the like might have
done. http//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bolton_v._Ston
e
6
Explain in your own words
7

• What does a claimant have to prove in a personal
  injury case?
• A - a duty of care must exist between the person
  injured and the person responsible for that
  injuryB - conduct of the defendant fell short
  of that duty of care andC - resultant
  damages.
• Or, in court
• Establish duty of care
• Prove that the standard has been breached by the
  defendant and
• Prove that the Plaintiff has been harmed and that
  the harm flows from the defendants breach
• How are these necessities reflected in the case
  of Chittock vs. Woodbridge School?

8
How are these necessities reflected in the case
of Chittock vs. Woodbridge School?