Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Dear All,

    I am studying law. The teacher has taught us Negligence but has given limited cases on the topic of actionable damage.

    So far we have been taught that there are 4 main elements to negligence. These elements must be mentioned in a problem question.

    1. Actionable damage
    2. Duty of care
    3. Breach of duty
    4. Causation

    - Then Defences

    My question relates to the first of these elements which i can find so little information on.

    So far I have only a few cases such as
    Hinz v Berry - regarding psychiatric harm

    Spartan Steel & Alloys Ltd v Martin & Co (Contractors) Ltd [1973] 1 QB 27 - regarding pure economic loss
    Questions i need help on:

    1. I am not 100% sure on the position for pleural plaques due to the confusion with Rothwell case, Damages (asbestos related) act 2009 (Scotland) and finally AXA General Insurance Ltd v Lord Advocate [2011] UKSC 46 - could someone please clarify what is the position on whether pleural plaques are actionable?

    2. Can somebody please help give me some cases and say what they regard to like i have shown above for Hinz v berry and Spartan steel.

    I don't mind searching the cases myself, but i don't know where to look due to the lack of info on the net.

    I was mainly looking for a case that shows that personal injury and psychical damage is actionable.

    Cheers
    Jack
    • Community Assistant
    • PS Reviewer
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Community Assistant
    PS Reviewer
    Tort has the following elements:

    1. Duty (eg: Standard of Care, 'reasonable skill and diligence' etc)
    2. Breach of duty
    3. Causation (IE: The breach must have caused the loss below)
    4. Loss
    [5. Defences]

    There isn't a case to answer if there isn't a loss.

    I think what your teacher means in 'actionable damage' is whether it is reasonably foreseeable and soforth, which comes under both duty and causation. There is the test in White and similar cases, which should be in your textbook for Causation.

    I don't understand what you're asking for - do you need to know what 'reasonable damage' is? Or are you trying to find out the test for whether the loss is serious enough to bring a case? Or causation?

    If you have a scenario that illustrates your question, that would be helpful.

    (Original post by Revisionrobot)
    1. Actionable damage
    2. Duty of care
    3. Breach of duty
    4. Causation

    - Then Defences

    My question relates to the first of these elements which i can find so little information on.
    EDIT: "Teacher" - are you an A-Level student or Undergraduate (as suggested in the thread title)
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Brexit voters: Do you stand by your vote?
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Write a reply...
    Reply
    Hide
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.