A passenger, who encouraged the drunk, unlicensed driver of a motorcycle to drive recklessly, was severely injured in a crash. The Court of Appeal held his claim for negligence was barred by the defence of illegality (*ex turpi causa*), as his injuries were inseparable from the joint criminal enterprise he was participating in. Facts The claimant, Stephen Pitts, aged 18, was a passenger on a motorcycle driven by Mr Hunt, aged 16. Both had spent the evening drinking heavily. The claimant knew that Hunt was unlicensed, uninsured, and had consumed a significant amount of alcohol. Despite this, the claimant got
In a landmark case concerning educational negligence, a local authority was held vicariously liable for its employed psychologist's failure to diagnose a pupil's dyslexia. The House of Lords established that educational professionals owe a direct duty of care to pupils. Facts This case comprised four conjoined appeals, all centred on the alleged failure of local education authorities (LEAs) or their employees to identify and provide for the special educational needs, specifically dyslexia, of pupils. The primary appellant, Pamela Phelps, attended schools under the Hillingdon London Borough Council. Despite showing clear signs of learning difficulties, an educational psychologist employed by the
A Rolls Royce requiring a £75 respray from a prior accident was subsequently hit by the defendant. This second impact also necessitated a respray. The court held the defendant was not liable as his action caused no additional loss. Facts The plaintiffs’ (Performance Cars Ltd) Rolls Royce Silver Cloud motor car was involved in a collision with a car driven by a Mr. F, who admitted liability. The damage sustained required a respray of the entire lower part of the body of the car, at an estimated cost of £75. Approximately two weeks later, before any repairs had been carried
Claimants hired a fraudulent swimming pool installer they found on the website of a trade association (SPATA). When they lost money, they sued SPATA for negligent misstatement. The court held SPATA owed no duty of care, as the website provided general information with disclaimers, not a specific representation upon which the claimants could justifiably rely. Facts The claimants, Mr and Mrs Patchett, wished to install a swimming pool at their home. They visited the website of the defendant, the Swimming Pool and Allied Trades Association Ltd (SPATA), a trade body for the swimming pool industry. On the website, they found
A mother sued for negligent sterilisation resulting in the birth of a child with significant disabilities. The Court of Appeal held that while the ordinary costs of raising a healthy child are not recoverable, the additional costs associated with the child's disability are. Facts The claimant, Ms Parkinson, a mother of four, underwent a sterilisation operation performed by a surgeon employed by the defendant NHS Trust. The procedure was carried out negligently. Subsequently, she became pregnant and gave birth to her fifth child, Christopher. Christopher was born with significant disabilities, including autism and behavioural difficulties, although these were not caused
A one-eyed mechanic was blinded in his remaining good eye while working. The House of Lords held his employer, Stepney Borough Council, was negligent for not providing safety goggles, establishing that the duty of care must consider the employee's particular vulnerability. Facts The appellant, Mr Paris, was employed by the respondent, Stepney Borough Council, as a garage hand. It was known to his employers that he only had sight in one eye, having lost the other in a war injury. While engaged in maintenance work on a vehicle, he used a hammer to knock out a rusted U-bolt. A chip
The mother of a child murdered by a psychiatric patient sued the responsible health authority for negligence. The court held no duty of care was owed as there was insufficient proximity; the victim was not an identifiable individual at particular risk. Facts The claimant was the mother of Rosie Palmer, a four-year-old child who was abducted, sexually abused, and murdered by John Armstrong on 30 June 1994. Armstrong was a psychiatric patient who had been diagnosed with a severe psychopathic personality disorder. He had been detained under the Mental Health Act 1983 and was under the care of the defendant,
The plaintiff, who was physically unhurt in a minor car accident caused by the defendant's negligence, suffered a recurrence of psychiatric illness (ME). The House of Lords held that where personal injury is foreseeable, a claimant is a 'primary victim' and can recover for psychiatric harm, even if that specific harm was unforeseeable. Facts The plaintiff, Mr Page, had suffered from myalgic encephalomyelitis (ME), also known as chronic fatigue syndrome, for approximately 20 years, but it was in remission at the time of the incident. In 1987, he was involved in a car collision caused by the negligence of the
The Wagon Mound ship negligently spilled furnace oil in Sydney Harbour, which later ignited and damaged a wharf. The court held fire damage was not a reasonably foreseeable consequence of the spill, thus being too remote. This established the ‘foreseeability test’ for remoteness of damage in negligence. Facts The appellants (defendants) were charterers of the ship, the S.S. Wagon Mound, which was moored at a wharf in Sydney Harbour. While taking on bunkering oil, a large quantity of furnace oil was carelessly spilled into the harbour by the appellants’ employees. The oil drifted across the water and accumulated around a
Nigerian parents of a British citizen child were refused leave to remain in the UK. They argued this breached their Article 8 ECHR right to family life. The Court of Appeal held that the child's citizenship was a primary factor but not determinative. Facts The appellants, Mr and Mrs Olotu, were Nigerian citizens who had entered the United Kingdom as visitors and subsequently overstayed their leave. Their daughter, Michelle, was born in the UK in August 1992 and was a British citizen by virtue of section 1(1) of the British Nationality Act 1981, as her mother was ‘settled’ in the
