Law · Year 12 · Tort Law - Negligence and Liability · 4.º Período

The Rules of Negligence

Students learn to establish liability in negligence by proving a duty of care, breach of duty, and resulting damage. They will apply the Caparo test and principles of causation.

TL;DR:Negligence is the most significant area of tort law, dealing with civil wrongs that cause harm. Students learn to establish a three-part claim: that a duty of care was owed, that the duty was breached, and that the breach caused reasonably foreseeable damage. The unit focuses on the Caparo test for 'novel' situations and the established categories of duty, such as doctor-patient or driver-pedestrian.

• National Curriculum Attainment Targets
• AQA A-Level Law 3.4.1.1 Liability in negligence
• OCR H415/02 1.1 Negligence

About This Topic

Negligence is the most significant area of tort law, dealing with civil wrongs that cause harm. Students learn to establish a three-part claim: that a duty of care was owed, that the duty was breached, and that the breach caused reasonably foreseeable damage. The unit focuses on the Caparo test for 'novel' situations and the established categories of duty, such as doctor-patient or driver-pedestrian.

Students also explore the 'reasonable person' standard used to determine breach of duty, considering factors like the magnitude of risk and the social utility of the defendant's actions. Finally, they examine causation and remoteness, ensuring the damage wasn't too 'far-fetched.' This topic is essential for understanding how the law compensates victims of accidents and professional errors.

This topic comes alive when students can physically model the patterns of the Caparo test through collaborative investigation of real-world negligence claims.

Key Questions

1. How is a duty of care established using the Caparo test?
2. What factors determine if a breach of duty has occurred?
3. How do the courts assess remoteness of damage?

Watch Out for These Misconceptions

Common Misconception

The Caparo test is used for every single negligence case.

What to Teach Instead

It is only used for 'novel' situations where no established duty exists. For common situations like car accidents, the duty is already established. A 'duty flowchart' helps students decide when to apply Caparo and when to use precedent.

Common Misconception

A 'breach' means the defendant did something on purpose.

What to Teach Instead

Negligence is about falling below the standard of a reasonable person, regardless of intent. Using a 'standard of care' checklist helps students focus on objective behavior rather than subjective mindsets.

Active Learning Ideas

Inquiry Circle

The Caparo Filter

Groups are given unusual scenarios (e.g., a rescuer injured at a scene). They must apply the three stages of the Caparo test, foreseeability, proximity, and 'fair, just and reasonable', to decide if a duty of care should exist.

40 min·Small Groups

Gallery Walk

The Reasonable Person

Stations feature different defendants: a learner driver, a specialist surgeon, and a child. Students move around to define the 'standard of care' for each, noting how the law adjusts the 'reasonable person' test for different roles.

30 min·Small Groups

Think-Pair-Share

Remoteness of Damage

Students read the facts of The Wagon Mound (No 1). They discuss in pairs whether it is fair that a defendant is only liable for the *type* of harm that was foreseeable, even if the *extent* was not, before sharing with the class.

20 min·Pairs

Frequently Asked Questions

What are the three parts of the Caparo test?

1) Was the harm reasonably foreseeable? 2) Was there a relationship of proximity between the parties? 3) Is it fair, just, and reasonable to impose a duty of care? All three must be met for a duty to be established in a novel case.

How do courts decide if a duty has been breached?

They use the objective 'reasonable person' test. They also consider 'risk factors' like the likelihood of harm, the seriousness of potential injury, the cost of precautions, and whether the activity had a social benefit (e.g., an emergency service).

What is the 'thin skull' rule in tort?

The 'egg-shell skull' rule means you must take your victim as you find them. If the *type* of injury is foreseeable, the defendant is liable for the full extent of the harm, even if the victim had a pre-existing condition that made it worse.

How can active learning help students understand negligence?

Active learning, like 'standard of care' role plays, helps students internalize the objective nature of negligence. By debating whether a 'reasonable' person would have taken a specific precaution, students move beyond memorizing rules to applying legal reasoning to the messy realities of accidents.