Duty of care: Difference between revisions

From The Jolly Contrarian
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(Created page with "The implied duty one has to one’s neighbours, those to whom one’s customers give ginger-beer you have sold them, and those whose Ryl...")
 
No edit summary
 
(3 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
The implied duty one has to one’s neighbours, those to whom [[Donoghue v Stevenson - Case Note|one’s customers give ginger-beer you have sold them]], and those whose [[Rylands v Fletcher - Case Note|adjoining mineshafts are prone to flood should your reservoir leak]].
{{g}}The implied duty one has to one’s [[neighbour]]s, those to whom [[Donoghue v Stevenson - Case Note|one’s customers give ginger-beer you have sold them]], and those whose [[Rylands v Fletcher - Case Note|adjoining mineshafts are prone to flood should your reservoir leak]].
 
The [[duty of care]] grew out of the [[common law]] of {{t|negligence}} — principles of law governing relations between those who are ''not'' bound by {{t|contract}} — that is to say, randoms — and therefore who do not have any agreed obligations to each other. The common law, articulated by Lord Atkin in {{casenote|Donoghue|Stevenson}} is that one does have a basic [[duty of care]] to one’s [[neighbour]] to observe the standard of conduct one might expect of the [[reasonable person]] — at the time of course expressed as the reasonable man, leading the great [[A. P. Herbert]] to muse whether, at law there was such a thing as a [[reasonable woman]].


{{sa}}
{{sa}}

Latest revision as of 19:07, 21 July 2022

The Jolly Contrarian’s Glossary
The snippy guide to financial services lingo.™


Index — Click the ᐅ to expand:

Comments? Questions? Suggestions? Requests? Insults? We’d love to 📧 hear from you.
Sign up for our newsletter.

The implied duty one has to one’s neighbours, those to whom one’s customers give ginger-beer you have sold them, and those whose adjoining mineshafts are prone to flood should your reservoir leak.

The duty of care grew out of the common law of negligence — principles of law governing relations between those who are not bound by contract — that is to say, randoms — and therefore who do not have any agreed obligations to each other. The common law, articulated by Lord Atkin in Donoghue v Stevenson is that one does have a basic duty of care to one’s neighbour to observe the standard of conduct one might expect of the reasonable person — at the time of course expressed as the reasonable man, leading the great A. P. Herbert to muse whether, at law there was such a thing as a reasonable woman.

See also