Turn on thread page Beta
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    5
    ReputationRep:
    Lord Oliver in Caparo - ‘To apply as a test of liability only the foreseeability of possible damage without some further control would be to create a liability wholly indefinite in area, duration and amount and would open up a limitless vista of uninsurable risk for the professional man.’

    I understand that the Caparo test reflects policy considerations that opening the floodgates of damages due to negligence needs to be avoided; that foreseeability is not enough to limit claims and liability with remoteness would cause limitless claims hence the three-stage test.

    However, I would really like to be able to discuss a broader view to be able to formulate an opinion on Lord Oliver's statement.
    Thanks.
    • Community Assistant
    • PS Reviewer
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Community Assistant
    PS Reviewer
    Read some more cases applying and/or distinguishing Caparo
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    5
    ReputationRep:
    Thank you.
    Is there any in particular you would advise?
    I was thinking along the lines of Brooks case for Hill Immunity, foreseeability such as Bourhill v Young, Marc Rich v Bishop Rock Marine Co for the additional requirement of that it must be fair, just and reasonable to impose a duty of care, Yorkshire ripper case law for public policy. Maybe a case in omissions. The basis of novel and established duties of care. Compensation culture is another area I would like to look into also.

    Also, could anyone explain judicial policy to me, I get that rather than referring to set rules, underlying policy helps reach a more balanced judgment but could do with further explanation of its use if possible please?
    Thanks.
    Offline

    6
    ReputationRep:
    Obviously foreseeability alone is not enough. It is only the first limb of the threefold test in Caparo v Dickman.

    Second limb of is proximity of relationship.

    Third limb is "fair, just and reasonable". This limb involves public policy. It means judges is not guided simply by precedents or the law alone but by whatever is fair, just and reasonable. Judges turn themselves into ministers, senior civil servants and possibly MPs.

    Does the question simply ask you to discuss Lord Oliver's statement? or is it something more?
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    5
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by pcll99)
    Obviously foreseeability alone is not enough. It is only the first limb of the threefold test in Caparo v Dickman.

    Second limb of is proximity of relationship.

    Third limb is "fair, just and reasonable". This limb involves public policy. It means judges is not guided simply by precedents or the law alone but by whatever is fair, just and reasonable. Judges turn themselves into ministers, senior civil servants and possibly MPs.

    Does the question simply ask you to discuss Lord Oliver's statement? or is it something more?
    It's a discuss and form a view of whether agree or disagree with it question.
    Offline

    6
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by LauraS.)
    It's a discuss and form a view of whether agree or disagree with it question.

    You should agree and cite judgements both before and after Caparo, showing even if there is foreseeability, judges couldn't find enough proximity.

    Next, cite cases showing even if there are foreseeability and proximity, judges often find in favour of defendants for public policy reasons.
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
Turn on thread page Beta
Updated: March 18, 2018
The home of Results and Clearing

1,053

people online now

1,567,000

students helped last year

University open days

  1. SAE Institute
    Animation, Audio, Film, Games, Music, Business, Web Further education
    Thu, 16 Aug '18
  2. Bournemouth University
    Clearing Open Day Undergraduate
    Fri, 17 Aug '18
  3. University of Bolton
    Undergraduate Open Day Undergraduate
    Fri, 17 Aug '18
Poll
Do you want your parents to be with you when you collect your A-level results?

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.