The Student Room Group
Competition - post a photo you've taken of nature >>
Competition - post a photo you've taken of nature >>
Competition - post a photo you've taken of nature >>

I need help!!!! (A level law)

So recently my teacher said that if we get an exam scenario where there is potential new precedent in negligence we no longer follow the Caparo test but a new one which is apparently the Robinson test. I asked her what are the requirements but she told me and the class to research it ourselves.Yet all of us are confused and cannot find much on it or we don’t understand it.
Can anyone plzzz tell me what’s the test and what requirements does it have
Reply 1
Avatar for astrid07
astrid07
4
The Robinson test basically modernised the Neighbour Principle from Donoghue v Stevenson.
They said that there was no single definitive test to use that addresses whether there is a duty of care.
The courts now need to look at:
1) Is there a previous precedent in that particular area of duty of care
2) Is there a statutory authority that provides the duty of care (like the Road Traffic Act 1988)
3) If it is a novel case, apply the Caparo test under Caparo v Dickman
Basically, don't use the caparo test if there is case precedent that can be followed. If there is no precedent use caparo. Also the fair, just and reasonble aspect is no longer really to be used
Original post by astrid07
The Robinson test basically modernised the Neighbour Principle from Donoghue v Stevenson.
They said that there was no single definitive test to use that addresses whether there is a duty of care.
The courts now need to look at:
1) Is there a previous precedent in that particular area of duty of care
2) Is there a statutory authority that provides the duty of care (like the Road Traffic Act 1988)
3) If it is a novel case, apply the Caparo test under Caparo v Dickman


What’s the difference between 1) and 2) ??
Original post by Jadeleah2
Basically, don't use the caparo test if there is case precedent that can be followed. If there is no precedent use caparo. Also the fair, just and reasonble aspect is no longer really to be used

eghhhh is it not the other way ?? That if there is a new precedent e.g drones is fairly new, then I would be using Robinson test but If it’s something common like car accidents then wouldn’t be the Caparo test
Robinson just says to use precent i.e. if a case was similiar to bourhill v young then Robinson would just be used to say that bourhill will be followed due to precedent being available. If not caparo will be used to try and find if there is a duty and if it is breached as there is no precedent available. So the drone thing you mentioned would be using the caparo test as there are no precedent
Original post by Jadeleah2
Robinson just says to use precent i.e. if a case was similiar to bourhill v young then Robinson would just be used to say that bourhill will be followed due to precedent being available. If not caparo will be used to try and find if there is a duty and if it is breached as there is no precedent available. So the drone thing you mentioned would be using the caparo test as there are no precedent

So how would I write in the exam like what do I write? If Robinson was to be applied like for my AO1 Ik but what about my AO2??? If the situation from the scenario would be similar to the cases that we studied would I just use those cases or ?? Like what would I have to say in regards to duty of care when using the Robinson test
You can just state that what Robinson 2018 changes and, if there is precedent, state what case. If not you can just use caparo. If its a 30 marker use caparo to establish why a duty was found. A02 would just be applying it to the scenario and yes you would use the cases studied if it is similiar. But if there is a slight difference then caparo may need to be used otherwise, when concerning evaluation points for a03, because a material difference would mean that the case would be distinguished from past precedent.
Original post by Jadeleah2
You can just state that what Robinson 2018 changes and, if there is precedent, state what case. If not you can just use caparo. If its a 30 marker use caparo to establish why a duty was found. A02 would just be applying it to the scenario and yes you would use the cases studied if it is similiar. But if there is a slight difference then caparo may need to be used otherwise, when concerning evaluation points for a03, because a material difference would mean that the case would be distinguished from past precedent.

Okay thank you soooooo much this is so helpful !!! Thank youuuu!!!! X
That's okay! Anymore questions feel free to ask :smile: x
Original post by vickkyyx
What’s the difference between 1) and 2) ??


the difference is that 1) is looking at previous decisions in cases and 2) is looking at legislation that states if there is a duty of care
Original post by CrazyJadey2001
Basically, don't use the caparo test if there is case precedent that can be followed. If there is no precedent use caparo. Also the fair, just and reasonble aspect is no longer really to be used

how do you know if there is a binding precedent tho it doesnt say???

Quick Reply

Related discussions

Latest

Trending

Trending

Articles for you