A-Level Tort law – 20 mark
evaluation points
Negligence – Positives
• Caparo covers novel situations – this means everyone has access to justice
even if the court have not heard your case before
• Judge will apply a similar law in duty of care to save time – Caparo not
needed every time
• Made up of case law - flexible
• Multiple risk factors that impact the duty – good because vulnerable
victims should have more of a duty of care over them – logical
• Criteria for professionals and children – logical because doctors should be
held against reasonable doctors, children have to be treated as their age
• Remoteness rule helps avoid distant/vague claims like Bourhill
• Lots of categories to meet means the floodgates are not easily opened
Negligence – Negatives
• Learner rule is harsh – not competent yet otherwise they wouldn’t be
learners!
• Not in an Act of Parliament – does not follow Parliamentary Supremacy or
Rule of Law
• Tests are objective – reasonable man test / Caparo questions –
inconsistencies in the law if difference in opinions
• Manufacturers owe a duty of care to end consumer – unfair on
manufacturers? They do not oversee the start to end process and can be
anomalies
• Time cost delay of going to court!
OLA 57 – Positives
• Allows lawful visitors to claim for both property damage and personal
injury – fair as they are lawful visitors
• Rules are clear and include everyone – everyone is either adult or child
then specific categories as well
• Parliamentary Supremacy respected – in an Act
evaluation points
Negligence – Positives
• Caparo covers novel situations – this means everyone has access to justice
even if the court have not heard your case before
• Judge will apply a similar law in duty of care to save time – Caparo not
needed every time
• Made up of case law - flexible
• Multiple risk factors that impact the duty – good because vulnerable
victims should have more of a duty of care over them – logical
• Criteria for professionals and children – logical because doctors should be
held against reasonable doctors, children have to be treated as their age
• Remoteness rule helps avoid distant/vague claims like Bourhill
• Lots of categories to meet means the floodgates are not easily opened
Negligence – Negatives
• Learner rule is harsh – not competent yet otherwise they wouldn’t be
learners!
• Not in an Act of Parliament – does not follow Parliamentary Supremacy or
Rule of Law
• Tests are objective – reasonable man test / Caparo questions –
inconsistencies in the law if difference in opinions
• Manufacturers owe a duty of care to end consumer – unfair on
manufacturers? They do not oversee the start to end process and can be
anomalies
• Time cost delay of going to court!
OLA 57 – Positives
• Allows lawful visitors to claim for both property damage and personal
injury – fair as they are lawful visitors
• Rules are clear and include everyone – everyone is either adult or child
then specific categories as well
• Parliamentary Supremacy respected – in an Act
