Duty Of Care Case Study

754 Words4 Pages
There is a duty to take reasonable care by which no foreseeable damage is caused to others as held in Donoghue v Stevenson. According to Lord Atkin, the duty of care owed to claimant by the defendant is defined in ‘neighbor principle’. In this principle, to avoid acts and omissions which you should reasonably foresee would be possible to damage your neighbor so reasonable care is taken. He also defines neighbors as “… persons who are so directly affected by my act that I ought reasonably to give them in contemplation.” In this scenario, Bert who got extensive injuries at that time was in the buildings of GCS so it may owe duty of care to Bert. This duty of care could not be discharged to contractors at GCS who renovated their premises. The neighbor principle states that in respect of premises the duty of care is owed to invitee by the…show more content…
In this case, possessor owed duty of care to its invitees who slipped on the floor in a store on a rainy day. As it is reasonable foreseeable Bert, including the shoppers, could be damaged by GCS’s actions and omissions and that physical proximity of Bert may be controlled and organized by GCS it can be said that GCS owes duty of care to Bert. For a Bert’s claim to be successful, it must not only prove that a duty of care existed, but also that duty was breached by GCS. First of all Bert should show that GCS is in breach of contract and then Bert should show that GCS has not shown the required standard of care. According to the Bolton v Stone, Mercer’s case, the standard of care owed by GSC is that of a reasonable possessor who takes reasonable care by which no foreseeable damage

More about Duty Of Care Case Study

Open Document