FINDING DUTY OF CARE
You are asked to explain the decisions in Caparo v Dickman, despite satisfying the general principles established by Donaghue(Identify the scope of the duty established in tort), the court has to consider on the facts whether it would be fair, just and reasonable to impose a duty of care ( in relation to negligently constructed building)
Last edited by ktwolves; 17-03-2012 at 23:35.
This is the issue:
'It is never sufficient to ask simply whther A owes B a duty of care.
specifically about the scope of the duties contractors owe to their employers
Limit of your essay " reference to the kind of damage from which A (contractors) must take care to save B (employer)harmless'
to decide if a duty should be imposed (my words)
Last edited by ktwolves; 18-03-2012 at 02:31.
As you wish, it is always necessary to analyse the question and answer the question asked and not the question you wish to answer. IMHO, the quote must be taken seriously. - 'It is never sufficient to ask simply whther A owes B a duty of care." .
(Original post by luap)
My life, just what I thought. ASK A QUESTION GET AN ARGUMENT!?
The question is asking what duty is owed and when, it is purely applicable to the question, that being contractor/employers. The 3 fold test in Carparo v. Dickman
is the very basis.
I know the answer, I was simply testing the waters, been some time since i was on this board, unfortunately same old guff.
Much much later.
A duty arises out of contract is a given before Caparo but.
You are asked to "Identify the scope of the duty with reference to the kind of damages caused " in relation to negligently constructed building. Negligence is presumed in this question, but whether a duty ought to be imposed as a policy matter to be debated in relation to the type of damages caused or building defects in particular.
OUT OF HERE.
Last edited by ktwolves; 18-03-2012 at 15:59.