Muutke küpsiste eelistusi

Principles of Tort Law 2nd Revised edition [Pehme köide]

3.50/5 (7 hinnangut Goodreads-ist)
(Queen Mary University of London)
  • Formaat: Paperback / softback, 1204 pages, kõrgus x laius x paksus: 245x188x43 mm, kaal: 2390 g, Worked examples or Exercises
  • Ilmumisaeg: 22-Oct-2020
  • Kirjastus: Cambridge University Press
  • ISBN-10: 1108727646
  • ISBN-13: 9781108727648
Teised raamatud teemal:
Principles of Tort Law 2nd Revised editionSuurem pilt
  • Formaat: Paperback / softback, 1204 pages, kõrgus x laius x paksus: 245x188x43 mm, kaal: 2390 g, Worked examples or Exercises
  • Ilmumisaeg: 22-Oct-2020
  • Kirjastus: Cambridge University Press
  • ISBN-10: 1108727646
  • ISBN-13: 9781108727648
Teised raamatud teemal:
Püsilink: https://www.kriso.ee/db/9781108727648.html
Märksõnad:
This book does what it 'says on the tin' - stating the corpus of tort law as a body of principles. Undertaken for the first time in English tort law, this book describes the law of tort concisely, accessibly, and accurately, and with both depth and detail.

Presenting the law of tort as a body of principles, this authoritative textbook gives an incisive understanding of the subject. Each tort is carefully structured and examined within a consistent analytical framework that guides students through its preconditions, elements, defences and remedies. Clear summaries and comparisons accompany the detailed exposition, and further support is provided by diagrams and tables which clarify complex aspects of the law. Critical discussion of legal judgments encourages students to develop strong analytical and case-reading skills, whilst key reform proposals and leading cases from other jurisdictions illustrate different potential solutions to conundrums in tort law. Ten additional chapters on more advanced topics can be found online, completing the learning package. This new edition has been updated to take account of important cases, legislative developments and law reform studies since July 2015.

Arvustused

'The second edition of Professor Mulheron's magisterial work consolidates its position as a comprehensive, compelling and insightful account of the principles of our Tort Law.' Rt. Hon. Lord John Dyson, Essex Chambers 'This is a superb book. Its unique approach combines a Restatement of principles with an in-depth analysis of the case law. The overall result is an illuminating, accessible, and practically useful account of the English law of tort.' Lord Andrew Burrows, Justice of the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom

Muu info

This book does what it 'says on the tin' - stating the corpus of tort law as a body of principles.
Foreword to the First Edition xxiii
Preface to the Second Edition xxv
How to Use This Book xxvii
Table of Cases
xxix
Table of Legislation
lxi
List of Abbreviations
lxix
Notes on Mode of Citation lxxiii
1 The Role of Modern Tort Law
1(34)
What Is a Tort?
1(8)
The Range of Modern Torts in English Law
1(7)
Disparities among the Torts
8(1)
The Purposes of Tort Law
9(6)
Torts in Context
15(6)
Obtaining Monetary Compensation
15(2)
Concurrent Liability in Contract and in Tort
17(1)
The General Principle
18(3)
Tort Litigation
21(5)
Sources of Tort Law
21(1)
Costs Rules in Tort Litigation
22(2)
Strike-out Applications in Tort Litigation
24(2)
Torts and Death
26(9)
An Action by/against the Estate
26(2)
The Dependants' Action
28(7)
PART I NEGLIGENCE
2 Duty I - General Principles Governing Duty of Care
35(87)
Introduction
35(8)
The Framework for Negligence
35(1)
A Brief Historical Overview
36(7)
The Modern Duty of Care Tests
43(8)
The Three Approaches: General
43(5)
Assuming the Existence of a Duty of Care
48(3)
Reasonable Foreseeability of Harm [ Caparo #1)
51(11)
Genera] Principles
51(6)
Claimants Susceptible to Injury
57(1)
The Unborn Claimant
58(4)
Proximity (Caparo #2)
62(3)
Policy Factors (Caparo #3)
65(46)
General Principles
65
Barristers (When Conducting Matters in Court)
1(71)
Children (Young)
72(2)
Doctors: `Wrongful Conception' Claims
74(8)
Doctors: `Wrongful Birth' Claims
82(4)
Emergency Services: Fire Brigade and Coastal Rescue Services
86(3)
Emergency Services: The Ambulance Service
89
Parental Liability for Their Children's Negligence
6(4)
Parental Liability to Their Children
10(80)
Police
90(11)
The `Bad Samaritan'
101(5)
Those Who Need Rescuing
106(2)
The `Good Samaritan'
108
Regulators/Inspectors/Certifiers
12(97)
Sporting Contests: Referees, Participants, and Others
109(2)
The Voluntary Assumption of Responsibility Test
111(8)
Proving an Assumption of Responsibility
111(5)
Proving Reliance
116(3)
The Incremental Test
119(3)
3 Duty II - Particular Duty Scenarios
122(45)
Statutory Preclusions of a Duty of Care
122(6)
A Mother's Immunity
122(2)
`Wrongful Life' Claims
124(4)
Failure-to-Warn Liability
128(14)
Introduction
128(2)
Inherent Risks
130(1)
Objectively Significant Risks
131(8)
Subjectively Significant Risks
139(3)
Timings
142(1)
Pure Omissions
142(6)
The General Rule
142(3)
Exceptional Scenarios
145(3)
The Failure to Control, Supervise, or Detain Third Parties
148(19)
Introduction
148(2)
The Leading Cases
150(4)
The Legal Analysis of the Leading Cases
154(13)
4 Duty III - Pure Economic Loss
167(48)
Introduction
167(2)
Negligent Misstatement
169(26)
Introduction
169(2)
Framework
171(1)
Reasonable Foreseeability of Economic Loss
172(1)
The Hedley Byrne, Caparo, and Incremental Tests
173(4)
The Bipartite Relationship
177(2)
The Tripartite Relationship
179(8)
The `Victim' Scenario
187(6)
Matters which Do Not Preclude a Duty of Care from Arising
193(2)
Negligent Provision of Services
195(11)
Introduction
195(1)
Relevant Scenarios and Legal Reasoning
196(10)
Pure Relational Economic Loss
206(9)
The Scenario
206(1)
The Governing Policy Reasons
207(5)
Conclusion
212(1)
A Comparative Perspective
212
Defective Buildings
12(1)
Liability in Negligence
12(7)
Liability under the Defective Premises Act 1972
19(196)
5 Duty IV - Pure Psychiatric Injury
215(73)
Introduction
215(5)
Uncertainties and Problems
215(2)
Pure versus Consequential Mental Injury
217(1)
The Framework
218(2)
Precondition #1 A Recognised Psychiatric Injury
220(6)
The Threshold Principle
220(2)
The Diagnostic Classifications
222(4)
Precondition #2 The Type of Claimant
226(18)
Primary Victims
227(9)
Secondary Victims
236(3)
The Elevated Primary Victim
239(2)
Fear-of-the-Future Claimants
241(1)
Residuary Claimants
242(1)
Stress-at-Work Claimants
243(1)
Conclusion
243(1)
Primary Victim Claimants
244(10)
Duty of Care Requirements
244(6)
Other Features of Note
250(4)
Secondary Victim Claimants
254(21)
Duty of Care Requirements
254(19)
Can C be Both `Primary' and `Secondary' Victim?
273(2)
Elevated Primary Victim Claimants
275(2)
Duty of Care Requirements
275(2)
Fear-of-the-Future Claimants
277(2)
Duty of Care Requirements
277(2)
Residuary Claimants
279(4)
Duty of Care Requirements
281(2)
Stress-at-Work Claimants
283(5)
Duty of Care Requirements
284(4)
6 Breach I - The Standard of Care
288(45)
Introduction
288(4)
Reasonableness, not Perfection
288(2)
No Average or Team Standard
290(1)
An Objective Standard, Subject to Exceptions
290(2)
The Impact (If Any) of D's Characteristics
292(19)
Specialism
292(7)
Age
299(3)
Disability (Physical or Mental)
302(3)
Inexperience
305
Parents, or in Loco Parentis
27(1)
Gender
28(283)
The Impact (If Any) of the Circumstances in which D is Operating
311(22)
Agony of the Moment' Scenarios
312(4)
`Diagnosis with a Focus' Scenarios
316(1)
Locality
316(2)
Dangerous Recreational/Sporting Pursuits
318(8)
Available Resources and Facilities
326
National versus Local Practices
29(304)
7 Breach II - Proving Negligence
333(67)
Introduction
333(2)
The Framework
333(1)
A Matter of Terminology
334(1)
Preliminary Matters
335(12)
The Test of Foreseeability
335(4)
The Date for Assessing Breach
339(3)
Ruling out `Inevitable Accidents'
342(1)
Potential Dual Bases of Liability: Vicarious Liability and Systemic Breach
343(4)
Testing Precautionary Steps against the Quadrant
347(12)
The Quadrant of Factors
348(6)
The Impact of the Compensation Act 2006, s 1
354(5)
The Bolam/Bolitho Framework for Breach Analysis
359(22)
The Bolam Test
359(9)
The Bolitho `Gloss'
368(7)
The Effect of the SARAH Act 2015
375(1)
Where the Bolam/Bolitho Framework Does Not Apply
376(5)
Other Potential Tests of Breach
381(3)
Contravening Specific Duties of Care
381(1)
Contravening Relevant Standards or Rules
382(1)
Contravening the `Making It Worse' Rule
382(2)
The Doctrine of Res Ipsa Loquitur
384(10)
Setting the Context
384(2)
Raising (and Rebutting) the Doctrine
386(5)
The Burden of Proof
391(2)
Two Concluding Notes
393(1)
What Does Not Prove Breach
394(6)
D's View, Pre-accident
394(1)
An Expert Organisation's Opinion
395(1)
A Change of System, Post-Accident
395(1)
Inherent Risks
396(1)
Relevance of `Gross Negligence'
397(3)
8 Causation of Damage
400(87)
Introduction
400(3)
Principles, with a Splash of `Common Sense'
400(1)
A Note on Terminology
401(1)
The Role of Policy
402(1)
Pre-requisite: Proof of Compensable Damage
403(5)
The de Minimis Threshold of Damage
403(5)
The `Loss of a Chance' Claim
408(1)
The First Step: The Classic `But-for' Test
408(8)
The Importance, and Limits, of Probability
409(4)
Legal Points about the Balance-of-Probabilities Assessment
413(3)
Exception #1 `Material Contribution to Risk'
416(23)
The McGhee/Fairchild Scenario
417(7)
The Wilsher Scenario
424(2)
The Scope of the McGhee/Fairchild Exceptional Theorem
426(4)
Apportionment of Damages
430(6)
The `Doubling the Risk' Theorem
436(2)
The `Hunting Cases'
438(1)
Exception #2 `Material Contribution to Damage'
439(4)
The Bonnington Principle
439(1)
A Comparison with the McGhee/Fairchild Principle
440(2)
Conclusion
442(1)
Exception #3 The Bolitho Causation Theorem
443(4)
The Leading Case and Theorem Explained
443(3)
Extending the Bolitho Causal Theorem to `Out-of-House' Scenarios
446(1)
Exception #4 The Chester v Afshar Causal Theorem in Failure-to-Warn Cases
447(11)
The General Rule
447(6)
The Chester v Afshar Exception
453(5)
Intervening Acts in the Causal Chain
458(11)
The Characteristics of an Intervening Act
458(1)
The Effect of an Intervening Act
459(1)
Particular Contexts
460(7)
Subsequent Medical Treatment
467(2)
Causation and `Pure Omissions'
469(1)
`Loss of a Chance' Claims
470(8)
What `Loss of a Chance' Means
470(1)
In the Medical Negligence Context
471(5)
In the Economic Context
476(2)
Supervening Event #1 D2's Supervening Tort Damaged an Already-Damaged Claimant
478(5)
Successive Tortfeasors
479(3)
Judicial Reaction to the Baker v Willoughby Principle
482(1)
Supervening Event #2 Non-tortious Reasons Would Have Led to the Same Damage
483(2)
The Burden of Proof
485(2)
The General Position
485(1)
What if D Causes the Evidential Difficulty?
485(2)
9 Remoteness of Damage
487(27)
Introduction
487(2)
What the Remoteness Enquiry Addresses
487(1)
Framework for Analysis
488(1)
The Kind or Type of Damage
489(10)
From Re Polemis to Wagon Mound
489(1)
The Meaning of `Reasonable Foreseeability'
490(7)
Exception to the Requirement of Reasonable Foreseeability
497(2)
The Position of `Egg-Shell Skull' Claimants with Pre-existing Vulnerabilities
499(4)
The `Normal Fortitude' Rule
499(1)
The `Egg-Shell Skull' Rule
500(3)
The `Scope of Duty' Enquiry
503(8)
A Further Control Mechanism
503(4)
The SAAMCO Principle
507(3)
Failure-to-Warn Scenarios
510(1)
Too Many Causal Links
511(1)
Policy: A `Final Arbiter'
512
Miscellaneous
31(483)
Continued Relevance of the Re Polemis Test
31(1)
Remoteness of Damage: Negligence versus Breach of Contract
32(482)
10 Defences
514(29)
Introduction
514(1)
Contributory Negligence
515(11)
Preliminary Matters
515(4)
The Elements
519(5)
The Doctor-Patient Context: A Policy
524(2)
Voluntary Assumption of Risk [ Volenti]
526(9)
What Volenti Means
526(1)
The Elements
527(6)
Miscellaneous Issues
533
Illegal Purpose (Ex Turpi Causa Non Oritur Actio)
35(1)
Two Forms of the Defence
35(2)
Preliminary Matters
37(2)
The Narrow Version of the Defence
39(3)
The Wide Version of the Defence
42(493)
Therapeutic Privilege
535(5)
Where It Applies
535(1)
The Elements
536
Exclusionary Clauses
49(1)
The Terminology of the Typical Clause
49(1)
The UCTA Effect
50(1)
The Motor Insurers' Bureau Exclusion Clause
51(489)
Necessity
540(3)
The Scope
540(1)
The Elements
541(2)
11 Remedies
543(38)
Introduction
543(1)
Compensatory Damages
544(23)
Pecuniary versus Non-Pecuniary Damages
545(6)
The Conventional Sum
551(1)
Heads of Damage Available to the Estate
552(4)
Heads of Damage Available to Dependants under the FAA
556(9)
Bereavement Damages
565(2)
Aggravated Damages
567(2)
Non-availability for Negligence
567(2)
Exemplary Damages
569(7)
The Position in English Law
569(2)
Practical Problems
571(3)
Policy Objections
574(2)
Nominal Damages
576(1)
Restitutionary Damages
577(4)
Meaning and Policy Goals
577(1)
Distinction between Proprietary and Non-proprietary Torts
578(3)
PART II SPECIFIC NEGLIGENCE REGIMES
12 Occupiers' Liability
581(57)
The Cause of Action Defined
581(4)
Where the Statutes Are Not Applicable
582(1)
Employees Who Are Visitors to an Occupier's Site
582(2)
The Framework
584(1)
Pre-requisites for the Legislation to Apply
585(11)
Precondition #1 An `Occupier'
585(3)
Precondition #2 `Premises' to which the Legislation Applies
588(5)
Precondition #3 The Type of Danger Posed by the Premises
593(3)
Which Act Applies?
596(7)
Visitors versus Trespassers
597(1)
Downgrading a `Visitor' to Trespasser Status
598(3)
Upgrading a `Trespasser' to Visitor Status
601(2)
Visitors under the Occupiers' Liability Act 1957
603(25)
A Duty of Care towards a Visitor
603(2)
The Requisite Standard of Care
605(4)
Proving Breach
609(18)
Causation/Remoteness
627(1)
Trespassers under the Occupiers' Liability Act 1984
628(6)
A Duty of Care towards a Trespasser
629(3)
Setting the Standard of Care and Proving Breach
632(2)
Defences
634(3)
Contributory Negligence
634(1)
Acts of Strangers
635(1)
Volenti
635(1)
Exclusion by Agreement or Otherwise
636(1)
Remedies
637(1)
13 Public Authority Liability
638
Introduction
638(2)
Direct versus Vicarious Liability
639(1)
Ancillary Causes of Action
639(1)
The Framework
640(1)
Pre-requisite Legal Issues
640(9)
The East Suffolk Principle
640(6)
The Policy versus Operational Distinction
646(1)
The `Pure Omissions' Principle
647(2)
Establishing a Duty of Care
649(26)
The `Making It Worse' Principle
649(1)
Assuming Responsibility for C, rather than for `the Common Good'
650(5)
The Caparo Framework
655(20)
An Incidental Duty of Care
675(1)
Impact of the ECHR
675(6)
Paths Worn to the ECtHR
675(1)
The Article 6 Problem
676(2)
The Strike-out Problem
678(1)
Amending the Common Law to Fit with the ECHR?
679(2)
Unenacted Law Reform
681
AN Liability for Animals
73(75)
Introduction
73(1)
The Two Relevant Causes of Action
73(2)
The Balancing Exercise for Damage Done by Animals
75(1)
Negligently Caused Injuries by Animals
76(1)
Duty of Care
77(1)
Breach of Duty
77(4)
Causation
81(1)
Remoteness
82(1)
Defences to Negligence
82(1)
The Problem of Straying Animals
83(1)
Statutory Cause of Action under the Animals Act 1971
84(1)
Pre-requisites
85(3)
Animals Belonging to a Dangerous Species
88(1)
Animals Belonging to a Non-dangerous Species
89(11)
The Flawed Implementation of Parliamentary Intention under s 2?
100(2)
Dogs which Do Damage to C's Livestock or Property
102(1)
Damage Done by D's Straying Livestock
102(3)
Remoteness
105(2)
Statutory Defences for D's Liability under s 2
107(5)
Statutory Defences for D's Liability under s 3
112(1)
Statutory Defences for D's Liability under s 4 or s 4A
112(36)
DP Defective Products
148(67)
Introduction
148(2)
An Action in Negligence
150(1)
The Framework
150(1)
The Rationale of Donoghue v Stevenson
151(1)
Preliminary Matters
152(1)
Precondition #1 No Damages for the Defective Product Itself
152(5)
Precondition #2 The Defective Thing Is an Appropriate Product
157(1)
Precondition #3 Capacity of D to Be Sued
158(2)
Liability in Negligence: Elements
160(1)
Element #1 Duty of Care
160(11)
Element #2 Establishing the Standard of Care and Proving Breach
171(6)
Element #3(a) Causation
177(2)
Element #3(b) Remoteness
179(1)
Defences and Remedies
180(3)
Actions under the Consumer Protection Act 1987
183(1)
Implementation of the European Product Liability Directive
183(1)
The Key Provision
184(1)
The Framework
185(1)
Preliminary Matters
186(1)
Precondition #1 No Damages for the Defective Product Itself
186(1)
Precondition #2 The Product is Covered by the CPA
186(2)
Precondition #3 Limitation Period
188(2)
Precondition #4 Capacity to Sue and to Be Sued
190(2)
Liability under the CPA: Elements
192(1)
Element #1 A Defect in the Product
192(7)
Element #2 The Defect Wholly or Partly Caused D's Damage
199(5)
Element #3 Relevant Damage Suffered by
204(2)
Statutory Defences under the CPA
206(1)
Compliance with Mandatory Regulations
207(1)
Not Put into Circulation
207(1)
Providing the Goods in a Private Capacity
207(1)
Defect Non-existing
208(1)
The `Development Risks Defence'
209(4)
The Defect Was Attributable to the Design of a Subsequent Product
213(1)
Contributory Negligence
213(1)
Volenti
213(2)
EM Employers' Liability
215(1)
Introduction
215(1)
Various Causes of Action
215(2)
The Difference between Personal Liability and Vicarious Liability
217(2)
Direct Liability: Common Law Duties in Negligence
219(1)
The Quartet of Duties
219(10)
Breach of Duty
229(4)
Causation and Remoteness
233(2)
When the Duties Apply
235(2)
Strict Liability: Statutory Deemed Negligence
237(3)
Direct Liability: Breach of Statutory Duty
240(1)
The 2013 Reforms
241(5)
The Way forward?
246(1)
Direct Liability: Non-delegable Duties re Independent Contractors
247(1)
The General Rule
247(2)
The Caveat
249
PART III OTHER SELECTED TORTS
14(949)
14 Trespass to the Person
685(64)
Introduction
685(3)
Trespasses versus Actions on the Case
685(2)
Ancillary Actions
687(1)
Assault and Battery
688(10)
The Framework
688(1)
Elements of Battery
689(6)
Elements of Assault
695(3)
False Imprisonment
698(13)
Definition
699(1)
Element #1 A Constraint
700(5)
Element #2 The Requisite Intent
705(1)
Element #3 Causation
706(5)
Defences
711(28)
Consent
711(8)
Necessity
719(9)
Prevention of Crime, Disorder or Ill-Discipline
728(4)
Self-Defence
732(2)
Contributory Fault
734(3)
Provocation
737(2)
Remedies
739(1)
Compensatory Damages
739(3)
Aggravated Damages
742(2)
Exemplary Damages
744(2)
Vindicatory Damages
746
Miscellaneous Issues
54(695)
An Art 5 Claim
54(2)
Vicarious Liability
56(2)
Limitation Periods
58(1)
An Action by the Deceased's Estate
58(691)
15 Defamation
749(84)
Introduction
749(3)
Framework for the Tort
749(1)
The Tensions and Complexities in Defamation
750(2)
Ancillary Actions
752(1)
Pre-requisites
752(17)
Precondition #1 Establishing Libel or Slander
752(7)
Precondition #2 The Matter Is Justiciable
759(2)
Precondition #3 Proof of a `Real and Substantial Tort'
761(5)
Precondition #4 Capacity of C to Sue
766(3)
Element #1 A Defamatory Imputation
769(14)
Ascertaining the Meaning
769(3)
Whether the Imputation is Defamatory
772(6)
Focusing on the Reasonable Reader/Listener
778(2)
The `Bane and the Antidote'
780(2)
Intent
782(1)
Element #2 Identification
783(5)
General Principles
783(1)
Problematical Scenarios
783(4)
Group Defamation
787(1)
Element #3 Publication
788(7)
When Publication Occurs
788(2)
About the Publishee
790(1)
Publication and the Internet
791(4)
Honest Opinion (Fair Comment)
795(7)
A Statement of Opinion (Not a Statement of Fact)
796(2)
The Basis of the Opinion
798(1)
Honest Opinion, Based on an Existing Fact, or a Privileged Statement
799(2)
Absence of Malice
801(1)
Truth (or Justification)
802(4)
An Imputation of Fact
803(1)
Substantially True
803(3)
Peer-Reviewed Statements in Scientific or Academic Journals
806(1)
Innocent Dissemination
807(3)
At Common Law
807(1)
Statutory Defence for Secondary Publishers
808(2)
Operators of Websites
810(1)
`Public Interest' Privilege (Formerly, the Reynolds Defence)
810(8)
General Matters re Reynolds
811(1)
A Matter of Public Interest
812(4)
An Objective Reasonable Belief
816(1)
Fact or Opinion
817(1)
Qualified Privilege
818(4)
Common Law Qualified Privilege
818(3)
Statutory Qualified Privilege
821(1)
Reportage
822(2)
Neutral Reporting
823(1)
Legitimate Public Interest
823(1)
Absolute Privilege
824(1)
Consent and Acquiescence
825(1)
An Offer of Amends
826(1)
Remedies
827(6)
Damages
827(4)
Declaration of Falsity
831(1)
Injunctive Relief
831(1)
Order to a Newspaper to Publish Report
832(1)
16 Private Nuisance
833(82)
Defining the Cause of Action
833(2)
The Framework
833(2)
The Costs of Litigation
835(1)
Pre-requisites for the Tort
835(15)
Precondition #1 Capacity of C to Sue
835(7)
Precondition #2 Capacity of D to Be Sued
842(6)
Precondition #3 The Threshold Principle
848(2)
Element #1 An Interference with Use and Enjoyment of Land
850(11)
Types of Interference
850(6)
Isolated Interferences versus a State of Affairs
856(2)
Emanation
858(3)
Element #2 An Unreasonable User
861(19)
General Points
861(1)
Application to `Physical Interference' Nuisances
862(1)
Relevant Factors for the Balancing Exercise
863(9)
`Coming to the Nuisance'
872(2)
The Role of Negligence
874(6)
Element #3(a) Causation
880(2)
Damage to Land/Interest in Land
880(1)
The `But-for' Test
881(1)
Element #3(b) The Damage Is Not Too Remote
882(7)
Type of Damage
882(2)
The Exclusionary Rule
884(3)
Abnormal Sensitivity
887(2)
Defences
889(10)
Statutory Authorisation
889(5)
A Right of Prescription
894(2)
The Independent Contractor/Non-delegable Duty Defence
896(1)
The `Common Enemy' Doctrine
897(1)
Estoppel by Acquiescence
897(1)
Acts of God
898(1)
Contributory Negligence/Volenti
898(1)
Remedies
899(13)
Compensatory Damages
899(7)
Injunctive Relief
906(3)
Damages in Lieu of an Injunction
909(2)
Abatement
911(1)
The Impact of the Human Rights Act 1998
912(3)
Proof of a Violation
912(1)
Damages under the HRA
913(2)
17 The Rule in Rylands v Fletcher
915(48)
Defining the Rule
915(1)
Putting the Rule into Context
916(5)
A Strict Liability Tort - but in a Limited Sense Only
916(2)
A Brief History of the Rule
918(3)
Pre-requisites
921(2)
Precondition #1 Capacity of C to Sue
921(1)
Precondition #2 Capacity of D to Be Sued
922(1)
Element #1 The Escape of a Dangerous Thing
923(10)
`Things' which have Escaped
923(2)
An `Escape' is Necessary
925(4)
The Mischief or Danger Test
929(1)
What D Must Know or Have Reasonably Foreseen
930(2)
Intentional versus Accidental Escapes
932(1)
Element #2 Deliberate Accumulation
933(1)
Element #3 A Non-natural User of the Land
934(8)
A Dramatic Change over Time
934(1)
The Modern Articulation and Application of the Test
935(7)
Elements #4(a) and #4(b) Causation and Remoteness
942(2)
Defences
944(5)
Act of God
944(1)
Act of Vis Major
945(1)
Act of a Stranger
945(3)
Consent (including Common Benefit)
948(1)
Statutory Authorisation
949(1)
Volenti/Contributory Negligence
949(1)
Miscellaneous
949(6)
Relationship with other Actions
949(3)
Should the Rule in Rylands v Fletcher be Retained?
952(3)
Remedies
955(1)
Escape of Fire: Statutory Regime
955(1)
Reason for the Act
956(1)
Protection Lost through Negligence
956(2)
Interplay of s 86 with Rylands v Fletcher
958
HA The Statutory Tort of Harassment
250(1)
Defining the Cause of Action
250(3)
Background to, and Application of, The Act
250(2)
The Framework
252(1)
The Elements of the Statutory Tort
253(19)
Element #1 A Course of Conduct by D Amounting to Harassment O
253(9)
Element #2 Targeted Conduct
262(1)
Element #3 Actual or Constructive Knowledge
263(4)
Element #4 Objectively Oppressive and Unacceptable Behaviour
267(1)
Element #5 The `Ultimate Balancing' Test under the ECHR
268(2)
Element #6 Causation
270(2)
Matters which Are Not Elements of the Statutory Tort
272(1)
Defences
273(6)
Prevention or Detection of Crime
273(5)
Pursuant to an Enactment or Rule of Law
278(1)
A Reasonable Course of Conduct
278(1)
Remedies
279(3)
Damages under the Act
279(3)
Injunctive Relief
282(1)
The Relevant Parties
282(34)
Harassment of a Corporation
282(3)
The Appropriate D in Harassment Cases
285(31)
PR Privacy
316(1)
Introduction
316(2)
The Framework
316(1)
Is It a Tort?
317(1)
Setting the Context
318(10)
No Generalised Tort of Privacy
318(3)
The Impact of the HRA 1998
321(3)
Breach of Confidence Action - Stretched to Breaking Point?
324(4)
Pre-requisites before Commencing a Privacy Action
328(3)
Precondition #1 Proof of a `Serious Infringement'
328(1)
Precondition #2 Capacity of the Corporate C to Sue
329(2)
Element #1 Proof of Private Information
331(14)
Identifying the Private Information
332(6)
Proving a Legitimate Expectation of Privacy
338(4)
How a Legitimate Expectation to Privacy Can Be Lost
342(3)
Element #2 The `Ultimate Balancing Test' Favours the Claimant
345(17)
Element #3 Publication, or other Misuse
362(1)
Element #4 Compensable Harm
362(1)
Defences
363(2)
Possible Defences (Already Considered)
363(1)
Contributory Negligence
363(1)
Self-Help Remedy
364(1)
Remedies
365(16)
Delivery-up Ct
365(1)
Damages
365(7)
Injunction
372(7)
Statutory Intervention
379(2)
PU Public Nuisance
381(1)
Introduction
381(3)
An Inconsistent Definition
381(1)
The Framework
382(2)
Pre-requisites for the Tort
384(6)
Precondition #1 The Capacity of C to Sue
384(3)
Precondition #2 The Capacity of D to Be Sued
387(1)
Precondition #3 The Threshold Principle
388(2)
Element #1 An Actionable Interference
390(7)
Types of Public Nuisance
390(6)
Matters which Are Not Relevant to Proving an Actionable Interference
396(1)
Element #2 Knowledge or Foreseeability
397(3)
The General Rule
397(2)
The Exception
399(1)
C's Fear of Danger
400(1)
Element #3 An Interference Affecting the Public (or a Section of It)
400(4)
A Common Injury to a Section of the Public
400(2)
The Numbers Affected by the Common Injury
402(2)
Element #4 The Interference Caused `Special Damage'
404(3)
The Requirement of `Special Damage'
404(2)
The But-for Test
406(1)
Defences
407(1)
Statutory Authorisation
407(1)
What If C `Comes to the Nuisance'?
408(1)
Remedies
408(7)
Damages
408(3)
Injunction
411(2)
An Undertaking
413(1)
Account of Profits
413(1)
Statutory CompensationO
414(1)
Miscellaneous Issues
415(3)
SD Breach of Statutory Duty
418(1)
Introduction
418(4)
The Framework
420(1)
Relationship with Common Law Negligence
420(2)
Preliminary Matters
422(2)
Precondition #1 No Legislative Ousting
422(1)
Precondition #2 Appropriate Territorial Application
423(1)
Elements of the Tort
424(27)
Element #1 A Statutory Duty on D
424(3)
Element #2 Parliamentary Intention to Confer a Civil Right of Action
427(8)
Element #3 For the Benefit of a Particular Class
435(8)
Element #4 Breach of Duty
443(4)
Element #5 Causation
447(2)
Element #6 Relevant Type of Loss
449(2)
Defences
451(2)
Contributory Negligence
451(1)
Volenti
452(1)
Breach of European Statutory Law
453(2)
Miscellaneous
455(3)
Law Reform
455(1)
Other Theories of Liability Arising from a Statutory Breach
456(2)
WD The Rule in Wilkinson v Downton
458(1)
Introduction
458(2)
A Brief History of the Rule
458(2)
The Framework
460(1)
Precondition: The Requisite Harm
460(6)
Physical Injury
461(1)
A Recognised Psychiatric Injury
461(5)
Elements of the Tort
466(7)
Element #1 The Requisite Act that Does the Harm
466(3)
Element #2 The Requisite Intention
469(2)
Element #3(a) Causation
471(1)
Element #3(b) Remoteness
472(1)
Remedies
473(490)
PART IV MISCELLANEOUS
18 Vicarious Liability
963(48)
Introduction
963(7)
The Vicariously Liable Employer: Some General Concepts
963(5)
The Role of the Wrongdoing Employee in Vicarious Liability
968(2)
Rationales for Vicarious Liability
970(4)
Strict (No-Fault) Rationales
971(1)
Fault-Based Rationales
972(2)
First Stage: The `Relationship' Limb
974(16)
Employee, `Akin to Employee', or Independent Contractor?
975(6)
Is the Employee on Loan to Another Employer?
981(5)
Dual Vicarious Liability
986(4)
Second Stage: The `Connection' Limb
990(13)
The Relevant Tests
990(5)
Some Difficult Scenarios
995(8)
Exceptional Cases: An Employer Can Be Vicariously Liable for the Torts of Its Independent Contractor
1003(1)
Ratification or Authorisation
1004(1)
Negligent Selection
1004(2)
Non-delegable Duties of Care
1006(4)
Borrowing Employees from the Independent Contractor
1010
Miscellaneous Matters
63(4)
Vicarious Liability and Exemplary Damages
63(2)
Where the Employee Assists Another to Commit a Tort
65(1)
Impact on Defences
66(1)
Vicarious Liability in Non-employment Relationships
67(47)
Where Vicarious Liability May Arise
67(3)
Problematical/Unsuccessful Legal Relationships
70(44)
BE The Beginning and End of Liability
114(1)
Introduction
114(1)
Accrual of the Cause of Action
115(11)
The General Rule
115(1)
A Lack of Knowledge, but Reasonable Discoverability
116(10)
Limitation Periods
126(13)
General Points
126(2)
The Applicable Time Limits
128
Matters which Stop the Limitation Period from Running
125(5)
Extension of the Limitation Period for Personal Injury Claims
130(4)
The Problem of Choosing the `Right' Cause of Action
134(4)
The Interaction between the ECHR and Limitation Periods
138(1)
When Liability Ceases Due to Preclusive Effects
139(149)
Cause of Action Estoppel
139(2)
Issue Estoppel
141(1)
Merger in Judgment
142(1)
Extended Principle of Res Judicata
143(2)
Doctrine of Accord and Satisfaction
145(1)
Set-off
146(142)
MD Multiple Defendants
288(1)
Introduction
288(1)
Suing Multiple Defendants: Joint, Several, and Proportionate Liability
288(11)
Key Concepts
288(3)
Joint Tortfeasors
291(2)
Several Concurrent Tortfeasors
293(5)
Independent Tortfeasors
298(1)
The Right to Contribution among Multiple Defendants
299(9)
The Relevant Statutory Provisions
299(2)
Background to the 1978 Act
301(2)
The Principles Governing `Just and Equitable' Apportionment
303(5)
Suing Multiple Defendants in Successive Actions
308(703)
Judgment Obtained against Dl, with Successive Action against D2
308(1)
Some Background to the Statutory Provisions Et
309(1)
The Problem of Subsequent Action/s after a Settlement between C and D1
310(701)
Index 1011
Rachael Mulheron is Professor of Tort Law and Civil Justice at the School of Law, Queen Mary University of London, where she has taught since 2004. Her principal fields of academic research concern tort law, medical negligence law, civil justice, and class actions jurisprudence. Rachael has published regularly in the field of tort-related litigation. Rachael was a member of the Civil Justice Council of England and Wales, the jurisdiction's law reform civil advisory body, 200918, and now undertakes the role of Research Consultant for that entity. During and since her tenure on the CJC, Rachael has chaired or participated in several working parties relating to collective actions, third party funding, and contingency fee law reform. Prior to her academic career, Rachael practised as a litigation solicitor in Brisbane, Australia.