Exam 4: Special Duty Problems: Omissions and Acts of Third Parties

In Smith v Littlewoods Ltd [1987]), Lord Goff suggested that outside of the general exclusionary rule, a duty of care can arise in respect of the actions of a third party in four clearly-defined types of situation. What are they?

What is the best explanation of why no duty of care was found in Smith v Littlewoods Organisation [1987]?

It is problematic to find that a duty of care is owed in negligence in respect of third parties. Who is the third party in the following situation? X fails to adequately supervise Y, with the result that Y does something to injure Z.

The law on whether there is, or can be, a duty with respect to the actions of third parties is closely related to the law on causation.

Parents always owe a duty of care to children in their care, even in respect of what would otherwise be regarded as pure omissions.

In which of the circumstances outlined below is there an omission to which liability might potentially attach?

Why did the claimants lose in Palmer v Tees Health Authority [1999]?

What reasons have been given to justify the principle that no duty of care is owed in respect of mere omissions? Please select all that apply.

Complete this quote, taken from Beldam LJ's speech in Barrett v Ministry of Defence [1995], showing why the Court of Appeal thought that the MOD did owe Barrett a duty of care. 'Until he collapsed, I would hold that the deceased was in law alone responsible for his condition. Thereafter, when the defendant _____ _____ for him, it accepts that the measures taken fell short of the standard reasonably to be expected. It did not summon medical assistance and its supervision of him was inadequate'.