filmov
tv
3. Bourhill v Young
Показать описание
Bourhill v Young [1943] AC 92
The claimant was a pregnant fishwife. She got off a tram and as she reached to get her basket off the tram, the defendant drove his motorcycle past the tram at excessive speed and collided with a car 50 feet away from where the claimant was standing. The defendant was killed by the impact. The claimant heard the collision but did not see it. A short time later, the claimant walked past where the incident occurred. The body had been removed but there was a lot of blood on the road. The claimant went into shock and her baby was stillborn. She brought a negligence claim against the defendant's estate.
Held:
The claimant was a pregnant fishwife. She got off a tram and as she reached to get her basket off the tram, the defendant drove his motorcycle past the tram at excessive speed and collided with a car 50 feet away from where the claimant was standing. The defendant was killed by the impact. The claimant heard the collision but did not see it. A short time later, the claimant walked past where the incident occurred. The body had been removed but there was a lot of blood on the road. The claimant went into shock and her baby was stillborn. She brought a negligence claim against the defendant's estate.
Held:
3. Bourhill v Young
Bourhill v Young [1943] AC 92
Bourhill v Young [1943] | tort law | law case notes
BOURHILL V YOUNG (1943)
Bourhill v Young
BCM563 (Bourhill v Young 1943 Duty of Care)
Bourhill vs Young under Tort
(Hay or) Bourhill V. Young, 1942 | Law of Torts | Faculty of Law | University of Delhi
AS Law Unit 2 tort (Silent movie)
Torts Cases- Hambrook v. Stokes Bros., & (Hay or) Bourhill v. Young ,& McLoughlin v. O’Brian...
# Tort of Nervous shock # Conditions for claim of Nervous shock # Bourhill Vs Young case law
Episode 005-The Neighbour test, Anns test and Caparo test.
1. Caparo Industries V Dickman 1990
Negligence: duty of care - personal injury and property damage www.e-lawresources.co.uk
The Duty of Care in the tort of negligence
Owens v Brimmell 1977
Jobling v Associated Dairies 1982
17BSB111 S11.6 Duty of care - summary
Kent v Griffiths 2000
Greatorex v Greatorex 2000
Tame v NSW (Reasonable foreseeability)
[Case Law Tort] ['thin skull rule'] Page v Smith [1996] 3 All ER 272 HL
Psychiatric Harm or Injury
Psychiatric Harm
Комментарии