Loss and Remedies in Negligence Cases

This section of the OCR A Level Law syllabus covers the concepts of loss and remedies in negligence cases, which are crucial for understanding how damages are awarded.

Loss

For a successful negligence claim, the claimant must have suffered loss in the form of damage to property or personal injury. However, not all losses can be claimed - only those that pass the remoteness of damage test.

Remedies

The two main remedies in negligence cases are:

1. Damages
2. Injunctions

Definition: Damages are monetary compensation awarded to the claimant, while an injunction is a court order to stop someone from doing something.

Damages

The principle behind damages in negligence cases is compensatory, not punitive:

• Damages should restore the claimant to their position before the loss
• The law is concerned with compensating the claimant, not punishing the defendant
• The claimant is not expected to profit from damages

Highlight: The claimant must follow the principle of mitigation of loss, which means taking reasonable steps to minimize their losses.

Types of damages:

1. Special damages: Specific losses up to the date of trial (e.g., loss of earnings, hospital fees)
2. General damages: Presumed to follow from the negligence (e.g., pain and suffering, future loss of earnings)

Vocabulary: Quantum of damage refers to the amount of compensation to be awarded.

Methods of payment:

• Lump sum
• Periodic payments

Injunctions

Definition: An injunction is a court order to stop someone from doing a specific action.

Failure to comply with an injunction can result in contempt of court, with a maximum penalty of 2 years in prison.

Example: In Coventry v Lawrence, the court emphasized the need to balance the needs of both the claimant and the defendant when issuing injunctions.

Defenses in Negligence Cases

The OCR A Level Law specification includes two main defenses in negligence cases:

1. Contributory Negligence
2. Consent (Volenti non fit injuria)

Contributory Negligence

Definition: Contributory negligence is a partial defense where the defendant is still liable, but damages are reduced according to the claimant's contribution to their harm.

Key points:

• Governed by the Law Reform (Contributory Negligence) Act 1945
• Both parties have an element of responsibility
• The judge decides the amount of responsibility for each party
• Damages are reduced by the percentage the claimant is responsible

Example: Common in road traffic accidents, such as a cyclist failing to wear a helmet.

Consent (Volenti non fit injuria)

Definition: Consent is a full defense where the defendant is not liable if the claimant willingly accepted the risk.

Example: The Sayers v Harlow Urban District case illustrates the application of this defense in negligence law.

Understanding these concepts is crucial for success in OCR A Level Law past papers and exams, as they form a significant part of the OCR A Level Law paper 1 topics.

Page 3: Defences in Negligence

The final section explores defences available in negligence cases, essential knowledge for OCR A Level Law specification 2024.

Definition: Two main defences exist in negligence:

1. Contributory Negligence (partial defence)
2. Consent $volenti non fit injuria - complete defence$

Highlight: Under the Law Reform (Contributory Negligence) Act 1945, damages can be reduced based on the claimant's contribution to their harm.

Example: Common in road traffic accidents, such as cyclists not wearing helmets.

Vocabulary: Volenti non fit injuria means "to a willing person, injury is not done" - a complete defence when the claimant consented to the risk.

Legal Causation: Remoteness of Damage

Legal causation is the final element required to establish negligence. It determines the extent of damage attributable to the defendant. Key points include:

• Damage must be reasonably foreseeable, not too remote
• Defendant liable only for foreseeable consequences of duty breach
• Type of damage must be reasonably foreseeable

Example: The Wagon Mound (No 1) case established that if minor damage of a particular kind was foreseeable, the defendant would be liable.

Highlight: As long as the type of damage is foreseeable, unusual forms of that damage are still covered.

The Bradford v Robinson Rentals case illustrates this principle:

Example: An employee suffered frostbite while driving an old van in cold weather. The court ruled it was foreseeable that some cold-related injury could occur in those circumstances.

Intervening Acts

Intervening acts (novus actus interveniens) may break the chain of causation, potentially relieving the defendant of liability. These can include:

• Third party actions
• Claimant's own actions
• Acts of nature

Definition: Novus actus interveniens refers to a new intervening act that breaks the chain of causation between the defendant's negligence and the resulting harm.

The key question is whether the resulting damage was a foreseeable consequence of the original act or the intervening act.

Example: In Hughes v Lord Advocate, workmen left a manhole covered by a tent with paraffin lamps. Boys entered and caused an explosion. The court ruled the type of injury was foreseeable, even if the specific explosion was not.

Example: Smith v Littlewoods involved vandals starting a fire in an empty cinema, damaging adjoining properties. The court considered this vandalism a novus actus interveniens.

"Egg-shell skull" rule

This rule states that liability is not lessened because the claimant had a pre-existing condition that worsened their injuries.

Example: In Smith v Leech Brain, a workman's slight burn from molten metal aggravated a pre-existing cancerous condition, leading to death. The court upheld the principle of "you take your victim as you find him."