In English law, negligence is the central tort governing liability for carelessly causing harm. It provides a route to compensation where
a person (or public body) owes a duty of care, breaches that duty, and the breach causes foreseeable loss that is not too remote.
A negligence claim typically requires the claimant to prove: (1) a duty of care, (2) breach of that duty measured against the standard of
the reasonable person (or the reasonable professional), (3) factual causation (the “but for” test), (4) legal causation and remoteness
(the damage must be a foreseeable kind of harm), and (5) that no complete defence defeats the claim.
Duty is often analysed through foreseeability, proximity, and whether it is fair, just and reasonable to impose liability. Breach focuses
on whether reasonable care was taken in the circumstances, balancing factors like likelihood and seriousness of harm and the practicality of
precautions. Causation and remoteness limit liability so defendants are not responsible for every downstream consequence of an act.
Negligence claims commonly arise from road traffic accidents, slips and trips in public places, negligent medical treatment, defective
advice or services by professionals, unsafe premises, and failures by occupiers or employers to manage foreseeable risks. Public authority
negligence can arise, but duty issues are often contentious because courts are cautious about imposing broad liability for operational and
policy decisions.
Remedies are usually compensatory damages aimed at putting the claimant, so far as money can, in the position they would have been in had the negligence not occurred. Heads of loss can include pain and suffering, loss of amenity, past and future earnings, care costs, medical
expenses, and property damage. Limitation, contributory negligence, and causation disputes often drive outcomes as much as breach.
Negligence is foundational for students and practitioners because it connects core ideas of responsibility, risk, and compensation across
personal injury, professional liability, occupiers’ liability, and public law-adjacent claims. Understanding the structure of duty, breach,
causation, and remoteness helps you spot issues quickly and evaluate prospects in both litigation and pre-action settlement.
You may also find our more detailed guide to negligence helpful.
See also: Duty of care; Breach of duty; Causation; Remoteness; Contributory negligence; Voluntary assumption of risk; Professional
negligence; Occupiers’ liability; Public authority liability; Vicarious liability.
February 18, 2026
The Claimant alleged the Defendant, who managed their business operations, breached duties as a de facto director by extending unauthorised credit to G-Force, which subsequently went into administration causing a £481,727 loss. The Court found the Defendant was not a de facto director, had no binding instruction prohibiting credit extension,...
February 14, 2026
In the recent judgement Lewis-Ranwell v G4S Health Services (UKSC/2024/0040), the Supreme Court held that the illegality defence can bar a negligence claim even where the claimant was found not guilty by reason of insanity for unlawful killings that sit at the centre of the loss claimed.
February 14, 2026
A man who killed three people during a psychotic episode was found not guilty of murder by reason of insanity. He sued healthcare providers for negligence, claiming damages for his detention and other losses. The Supreme Court held that the illegality defence barred his civil claim despite his lack of...
October 5, 2025
Overseas Tankship’s ship Wagon Mound leaked furnace oil in Sydney harbour. Welding sparks ignited it, destroying nearby repair ships. The Privy Council held that even a very small but serious risk must be guarded against if reasonably foreseeable, shaping negligence breach analysis. Facts Overseas Tankship (UK) Ltd chartered a freighter,...
October 5, 2025
Children alleged serious failings by social services in protection from abuse, and by education authorities in providing for special educational needs. The House of Lords held there was no duty of care in the child protection functions or statutory educational discretions, but allowed limited negligence claims against educational psychologists and...
October 5, 2025
A professional photographer unfamiliar with horses was injured at a horse show when a competitor's horse veered off course during a galloping competition. The Court of Appeal held the rider was not negligent, establishing that participants in sporting events owe spectators a duty not to show reckless disregard for their...
October 5, 2025
A 10‑year‑old pupil suffered severe brain injury during a school swimming lesson taught by independent contractors. The Supreme Court held that the local education authority potentially owed a non‑delegable duty to ensure reasonable care in such lessons, clarifying when public bodies have personal, non‑delegable duties despite outsourcing. Facts The case...
October 5, 2025
Mr Wheat, a paying guest in a public house, fell down an internal back staircase and died. His widow sued the brewery owners under the Occupiers’ Liability Act 1957. The House of Lords held the brewery were occupiers but had not breached the common duty of care. Facts Mr and...
October 5, 2025
A fireman was injured when a heavy jack, hastily loaded unsecured on a lorry during an emergency call to free a trapped woman, shifted and crushed his leg. He sued his employer in negligence. The Court of Appeal held there was no breach of duty, emphasising the higher risks justified...
October 5, 2025
Richard Vowles, a rugby hooker, was paralysed when a scrum collapsed after the referee permitted an inexperienced player to join the front row without proper enquiry. The Court of Appeal upheld that amateur referees owe players a duty of care to enforce safety rules, and the referee's breach caused the...
October 3, 2025
Roadworks contractors negligently damaged an electricity cable supplying Spartan Steel’s factory, causing physical damage to a melt in an arc furnace and loss of production profits during a 14½ hour outage. The Court of Appeal limited recovery to physical damage and directly consequential profit, excluding pure economic loss. Facts Spartan...
October 3, 2025
The tanker Inverpool stranded in the Ribble estuary. To refloat her, the master discharged about 400 tons of oil, which polluted Southport Corporation’s foreshore and Marine Lake. The Court of Appeal majority held the shipowners liable in public nuisance and negligence; the master was not personally liable. Facts The defendants...
October 3, 2025
A customs officer walking lawfully between warehouses in London docks was struck by six falling bags of sugar. The Exchequer Chamber held such an unexplained accident, where the docks were under the defendants’ control, was reasonable evidence of negligence, articulating the principle that the accident itself can prove fault. Facts...
October 3, 2025
Mr and Mrs Reilly were trapped in an overcrowded hospital lift for over an hour and claimed for psychological harm. The Court of Appeal held that mere fear, claustrophobia and transient physical symptoms without a recognisable psychiatric illness or physical injury are not actionable in negligence. Facts Mr and Mrs...
October 2, 2025
Two vulnerable children suffered years of harassment from neighbours after being housed next to a persistently anti-social family. They sued the local authority for failing to protect them under its Children Act functions. The Supreme Court held no common law duty of care arose on the pleaded facts. Facts The...
October 2, 2025
Mr Paris, effectively blind in one eye, was employed as a garage hand and suffered total blindness when a metal fragment entered his good eye while hammering a bolt. The House of Lords held that his known vulnerability increased his employer’s duty of care, requiring eye protection. Facts The appellant,...
October 2, 2025
Oil negligently discharged from the appellants' ship spread across Sydney Harbour and ignited, destroying the respondents' wharf. The Privy Council held that liability in negligence depends on whether the damage was reasonably foreseeable, overruling the 'direct consequences' test in Re Polemis. This established foreseeability as the test for remoteness of...
October 2, 2025
Mr Murphy purchased a house built on a defective concrete raft foundation which had been approved by the council's independent consulting engineers. When cracks appeared and the house became dangerous, he sold it at a loss. The House of Lords departed from Anns v Merton, holding that local authorities owe...
October 2, 2025
The plaintiff went on a flight with a pilot who had consumed the equivalent of 17 whiskies after spending the afternoon drinking together. The aircraft crashed, killing the pilot and severely injuring the plaintiff. The Court of Appeal held that the defence of volenti non fit injuria applied, as the...
September 30, 2025
Joanna Michael made a 999 call reporting threats from her ex-partner. Due to communication failures between two police forces, officers arrived too late and she was murdered. The Supreme Court held police owed no common law duty of care to protect individuals from third-party violence absent an assumption of responsibility,...
September 30, 2025
A cargo ship developed hull cracks during a voyage. A classification society surveyor initially recommended permanent repairs but reversed this decision, allowing the vessel to sail with temporary repairs. The ship sank, losing all cargo. Cargo owners sued the classification society in negligence. The House of Lords held no duty...
September 30, 2025
Mrs Letang was sunbathing in a car park when Mr Cooper accidentally drove his car over her legs, causing injury. She sued more than three years later, claiming trespass to the person to avoid the three-year limitation period for negligence. The Court of Appeal held that unintentional injury claims are...
September 30, 2025
A mother sued Pembrokeshire County Council in negligence after her children's names were wrongly placed on the Child Protection Register. The court struck out the negligence claim, following D v East Berkshire, holding that social workers investigating suspected child abuse owe no duty of care to parents suspected of abuse...
September 29, 2025
An asthmatic woman suffered respiratory arrest after the London Ambulance Service took 34 minutes to respond to an emergency call, when it should have arrived within 20 minutes. The Court of Appeal held that the ambulance service owed a duty of care to the claimant once the call was accepted,...
September 29, 2025
Workers negligently exposed to asbestos developed pleural plaques, which are asymptomatic fibrous changes in the lung lining. The House of Lords held that symptomless plaques alone, or combined with risk of future disease and anxiety, do not constitute actionable damage in negligence. Psychiatric illness from fear of future disease was...
April 16, 2026
National Case Law Archive
April 13, 2026
National Case Law Archive
April 13, 2026
National Case Law Archive