Liability in negligence cases
Lec 11
Strict approach taken here which means clear/ precise wording is needed
Negligence- fault
Strict liability- contractual liability, no fault
Canada steamship v R- 3 stage test approach to see if clause will cover negligence
1. The clause makes express reference to negligence
2. No express reference to n but words are wide enough to cover n, construed contra
proferentem? (Hollier)
3. Can party in breach be liable on some ground other than n?
Yes= likely words will be taken to refer to non-negligent liability only -strict liability
No= clause may cover n
Concurrent liability (White v John Warwick)
No express reference to n but construed to cover it (Alderslade v Henson
laundry ltd)
In scenarios, look for ‘carelessly’ or any proof of acting negligently.
Lec 11
Strict approach taken here which means clear/ precise wording is needed
Negligence- fault
Strict liability- contractual liability, no fault
Canada steamship v R- 3 stage test approach to see if clause will cover negligence
1. The clause makes express reference to negligence
2. No express reference to n but words are wide enough to cover n, construed contra
proferentem? (Hollier)
3. Can party in breach be liable on some ground other than n?
Yes= likely words will be taken to refer to non-negligent liability only -strict liability
No= clause may cover n
Concurrent liability (White v John Warwick)
No express reference to n but construed to cover it (Alderslade v Henson
laundry ltd)
In scenarios, look for ‘carelessly’ or any proof of acting negligently.
