Breach of Duty CASES
In English law, a breach of duty occurs in negligence claims when a defendant fails to meet the required standard of care. After establishing that the defendant owed a duty of care, courts must determine whether the defendant’s conduct fell below the level expected of a reasonable person or professional in the same circumstances.
Definition and Principles
Breach of duty involves comparing the defendant’s behaviour to the “reasonable person” standard. The defendant breaches their duty if their conduct is judged unreasonable or careless. In professional contexts (for example, doctors, lawyers, engineers), the standard is that of a reasonably competent practitioner in that profession. Relevant factors include the foreseeability of harm, the severity of potential injury, the practicality and cost of precautions, and accepted practices or guidelines within a particular industry or profession.
Common Examples
Common scenarios include negligent driving causing an accident, doctors making avoidable errors during medical treatment, employers failing to provide safe working conditions, or businesses neglecting reasonable safety measures that lead to injury. Each involves evaluating whether the defendant acted as a reasonable person or professional would have done.
Legal Implications
A finding of breach is essential to establishing liability in negligence. If breach is proven, the claimant must still establish that the breach caused the harm suffered (causation), and that the harm was foreseeable (remoteness). Without a breach, the claim fails at this critical stage, even if the defendant owed the claimant a duty.
Practical Importance
Understanding breach of duty helps law students and researchers structure negligence problems clearly, identify relevant standards of care, and assess the strength of claims or defences. Breach analysis guides parties on what evidence to gather and helps shape persuasive legal arguments.
See also: Negligence; Duty of care; Standard of care; Reasonable person; Professional negligence; Causation; Remoteness; Foreseeability; Risk assessment.
Home » Breach of Duty
A premature baby was given excess oxygen due to a doctor's negligence and subsequently went blind. However, there were other potential innocent causes. The House of Lords held the plaintiff must prove causation on the balance of probabilities, not simply that negligence increased the risk. Facts The plaintiff, Martin Wilsher, was born three months prematurely, weighing only 1.2 kg. He required care in a special care baby unit and was placed on oxygen therapy. A junior doctor negligently inserted a catheter into a vein rather than an artery, leading to monitoring equipment providing falsely low readings of the arterial oxygen
A firefighter was injured by unsecured equipment in a vehicle responding to an emergency. The court held the employer was not liable, as the urgent need to save a life justified a greater risk than in a commercial setting. This case established the importance of 'social utility' in assessing the standard of care in negligence. Facts A woman was trapped under a heavy lorry following an accident. The fire station, run by the defendants, Hertfordshire County Council, was called to the scene. This required the use of a heavy lifting jack. The specific vehicle designed to carry this jack was
