Hostname: page-component-68945f75b7-4zrgc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-08-05T14:08:21.982Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Affirmative Action in the Law of Tort: The Case of the Duty to Warn

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 January 2009

James G. Logie
Get access

Extract

One of the principal features in the development of private law in recent years has been the dramatic increase in the variety of circumstances in which courts are willing to hold that one party owes a duty of care in tort to another. The view that the categories of relationship which attract a duty of care at common law are immutably fixed by precedent and that any decision to extend them must be left to the legislature, expressed by one Law Lord as recently as 1970, now seems somewhat quaint and it is generally accepted that courts can, in appropriate cases, extend the scope of liability for negligence to embrace new types of relationships, conduct and harm. As the boundaries of liability have been rolled back, old immunities have been removed and duties of care (albeit sometimes restricted) have been established in areas previously considered to be beyond the scope of the law of tort. But there are still areas of confusion and difficulty, perhaps the most prominent of which in recent years have been the extent of liability for economic loss and for nervous shock. Another area of doubt, however, is the extent of liability for omissions. While it has not attracted as much attention as economic loss or nervous shock, the distinction between acts and omissions still exercises a powerful influence on judicial decision making on the question of tortious liability. This article considers the question of liability for one such omission, namely liability for a failure to warn someone of imminent danger. Before doing so, however, it is necessary to clarify exactly what is meant by an “omission.”

Type
Articles
Information
The Cambridge Law Journal , Volume 48 , Issue 1 , March 1989 , pp. 115 - 134
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge Law Journal and Contributors 1989

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Dilhorne, Viscount (dissenting) in Dorset Yacht Co. Ltd. v.Home Office [1970] A.C. 1004 at p. 1045Google Scholar.

2 Junior Books Ltd. v. Veitchi Co. Ltd. [1983] 1 A.C. 520; Muirhead v. Industrial Tank Specialities [1986] Q. B. 507; Simaan General Contracting Co. v. Pilkington Glass Ltd. (No. 2) [1988] 2 W. L. R. 761; Greater Nottingham Co-operative Society v. Cementation Piling and Foundations Ltd. [1988] 3 W. L. R. 304; D & F Estates Ltd. v. Church Commissioners for England [1988] 3 W. L. R. 368.

3 McLoughlin v. O'Brian [1983] 1 A. C. 410; Kralj v. McGrath [1986] 1 All E. R 54; Attia v. British Gas Plc [1988] Q. B. 304.

4 Cf. texts on criminal law. See for example, Smith, J. and Hogan, B., Criminal Law (6th. ed., 1988) pp. 48–55Google Scholar and Clarkson, C. V. M. and Keating, H. M., Criminal Law: Text and Materials (1984) pp. 103–120Google Scholar.

5 Bohlen, F. H., “The Moral Duty to Aid Others as a Basis of Tort Liability”, (1908) 56 University of Pennsylvania Law Review 217 at p. 220Google Scholar.

6 Heuston, R. F. V. and Buckley, R. A., Salmond and Heuston on the Law of Torts, (19th. ed., 1987) pp. 243–244Google Scholar.

7 For example, Jones, Michael A., Textbook on Torts (1986) p. 26Google Scholar.

8 Ross v. Counters [1980] Ch. 297.

9 Clay V. A. J. Crump & Sons Ltd. [1964] 1 Q.B. 533.

10 Squires v. Perth and Kinross D. C. 1986 S. L. T. 272; cf. P. Perl (Exporters) Ltd. v. Camden London Borough Council [1984] Q. B. 342.

11 See Junior Books Ltd. v. Veitchi Co. Ltd., supra.

12 In Ross v. Counters, supra at p. 304 and p. 318, for example, Sir Robert Megarry V. C. accepted that the negligence of the solicitors consisted of the omission to do certain things, but gave no further consideration to this issue.

13 Bowman, M. J. and Bailey, S. H., “Negligence in Public Law” [1984] Public Law 277 at pp. 284–85Google Scholar.

14 See, for example, Heuston and Buckley, op. cit., pp. 243–244; M. A. Jones, op. cit., pp. 26–30. For examples of judicial dicta emphasising the distinction see Smith v. Littlewoods Organisation Ltd. [1987] A.C. 241 per Lord Goff at p. 271; Curran v. Northern Ireland Housing Association Ltd. [1987] A.C. 718, per Lord Bridge at p. 724.

15 Buch v. Amory Mfg. Co. (1897) 69 N.H. 257. See also Handiboe v. McCarthy (1966) 151 S.E. 2d 905 and Sidwell v. McVay (1955) 282 P 2d 757.

16 Prosser, William L., The Law of Torts (4th. ed., 1971) p. 344Google Scholar.

17 See generally Smith, J. C., Liability in Negligence (1984) pp. 29–47Google Scholar; Smith, J. C. and Burns, P., “Donoghue v. Stevenson—The Not So Golden Anniversary”, (1983) 46 M. L. R. 147; Heuston and Buckley, op. cit., pp. 243–244, 265–266Google Scholar; Bowman and Bailey, op. cit. For an economic analysis, see Epstein, Richard A., “A Theory of Strict Liability” (1973) 2 Journal of Legal Studies 151CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

18 Smith and Burns, op. cit. p. 163.

19 See for exampleBeyleveld, D. and Brownsword, R., Law as a Moral Judgment (1986)Google Scholar; Lee, Simon, Law and Morals (1986)Google Scholar.

20 Weinrib, Ernest J., “The Case for a Duty to Rescue”, (1980) 90 Yale Law Journal 247 at pp. 265–266CrossRefGoogle Scholar; see also pp. 268–279, where he argues that any burdens imposed by the law can be justified by reference to corresponding restrictions on freedom of contract in cases of, inter alia, duress and coercion.

21 Smith and Burns, op. cit. at p. 154.

22 Cane, P., Atiyah's Accidents, Compensation and the Law (4th. ed., 1987) p. 84Google Scholar. See also Harris, J., “The Marxist Conception of Violence” (1973–1974) 3 Philosophy and Public Affairs 192Google Scholar; Kleinig, J., “Good Samaritanism” (1975) 5 Philosophy and Public Affairs 382Google Scholar; but cf. Mack, E., “Bad Samaritanism and the Causation of Harm” (1979–80) 9 Philosophy and Public Affairs 230Google Scholar.

23 See, for example, Sidaway v. Board of Governors of Bethlem Royal Hospital [1985] A.C. 871 (no duty to warn where probability of risk materialising is less than 1%).

24 Bowman and Bailey, op. cit. pp. 279–280, 284–285.

25 See Cane, op. cit. pp. 87–93; Heuston and Buckley, op. cit. pp. 243–244; Jones, op. cit. pp. 27–30; and Smith, op. cit. pp. 32–38.

26 Gautret v. Egerton (1867) L.R. 2 C.P. 371 at p. 375, per Willes, J. See also Yuen Kun-yeu v. Att. -Gen. of Hong Kong [1988]Google Scholar A.C. 175 at p. 192, per Lord Keith.

27 [1918] 1 K. B. 439 at p. 447. See also Hawkins v. Thames Stevedore Co. [1936] 2 All E. R. 472, per Atkinson L. J. at p. 476; Fisher v. Ruislip—Northwood U. D. C. [1945] 1 K. B. 584; Bird v. Pearce (1979) 75 L. G. R. 753; but cf. Murray v. Nicholls 1983 S. L. T. 194.

28 Buckland v. Guildford Gas. Light and Coke Co. [1949] 1 K. B. 410. See also British Railways Board v. Herrington [1972] A.C. 877. On the duty of care owed by occupiers to trespassers, see now Occupiers' Liability Act 1984.

29 Yachetti v. John Duff and Sons Ltd. [1953] 1 D. L. R. 194. Cf. Occupiers' Liability Act 1957 s. 2(4)(a), on which see Bunker v. Charles Brand & Sons Ltd. [1969] 2 Q.B. 480 and White v. Blackmore [1972] 2 Q.B. 651.

30 Mooney v. Lanarkshire County Council 1954 S.C. 245.

31 Haley v. London Electricity Board [1964] 3 All E.R. 185. See also Jauffar v.Akbar, The Times, 10 February 1984.

32 Johnson v. Rea Ltd. [1962] 1 Q.B. 373, per Ormerod L.J. at p. 381; A. C. Billings and Sons Ltd. v. Riden [1958] A.C. 240, per Lord Reid at pp. 252–253. 1. See also Schell v. A.M.F. Inc. 567 F(2d) 1259 (3d circ, 1977); Occupiers' Liability Act 1957 s. 2(5) and the cases cited at note 29 above; and Occupiers' Liability Act 1984 s. 1(6).

33 Buckner v. Ashby and Horner Ltd. [1941] 1 K.B. 321.

34 Canter v. Gardner and Co. [1940] 1 All E.R. 325.

35 Hills v. Potter [1983] 3 All E.R. 716; Sidaway v. Board of Governors of the Bethlem Royal Hospital, supra; Thake v. Maurice [1986] Q.B. 644; Wagner Associates v. Joseph Dunn (Bottlers) Ltd. 1986 S.L.T. 267; Gold v. Haringey Health Authority [1988] Q.B. 481.

36 Sidaway, supra, per Lord Bridge at p. 900; see also Lord Templeman at p. 903.

37 Sidaway, supra, per Lord Diplock at p. 895; see also Eyre v. Measday [1986] 1 All E.R. 488.

38 Leckie v. Caledonian Glass Co. 1957 S.C. 89; Esso Petroleum Co. Ltd. v. Mardon [1976] Q.B. 801; Cornish v. Midland Bank Plc. [1985] 3 All E.R. 513; La Banque Financière de la Cité SA (formerly Banque Keyser Ullman SA) v. Skandia (U.K.) Insurance Co. Ltd., The Times, 24 August 1988.

39 Midland Bank Trust Co. Ltd. v. Hen. Stubbs and Kemp [1979] Ch. 384; I.B.A. v. EMI and BICC [1980] 14 B.L.R. 1; Cornish v. Midland Bank, supra, cf. Argy Trading Development Co. Ltd. v. Lapid Developments Ltd. [1977] 3 All E.R. 785.

40 Leckie v. Caledonian Glass Co., supra; cf. Clay v. A. J. Crump and Sons Ltd., supra. See also Occupiers' Liability Act 1984 s. 1(3).

41 Brunswick Construction v. Nowlan (1974) 49 D.L.R. (3d) 93; Equitable Debenture Assets Corporation Ltd. v. William Moss and Others [1985] 2 Const. L.J. 131; Victoria University v. Hugh Wilson and Lewis Wormersley 1985 C.L.Y. 220.

42 Vacwell Engineering v. B.D.H. Chemicals [1971] 1 Q.B. 88; see also I.B.A. v. EMI and BICC, supra.

43 [1985] I.R.L.R. 215. See also Jauffar v. Akbar, supra.

44 Ibid., per Lawton L.J. at p. 218.

45 Sidaway, supra; White v. Holbrook Precision Castings, supra.

46 Haley v. London Electricity Board, supra; Fisher v. Ruislip-Northwood U.D.C. supra; Bird v. Pearce, supra.

47 Prosser, op. cit. p. 339.

48 [1987] 1 Lloyds' Rep. 67, noted by P. Matthews [1987] 1 L.M.C.L.Q. 5 and Davidson, F. P., “Insurers—Duty of Disclosure and Duty of Care” 1988Google Scholar S.L.T. 73. See also Muchlinski, P. T., “The Insurer's Duties of Good Faith and Disclosure” [1988]Google Scholar L.M.C.L.Q. 27.

49 [1978] A.C. 728 at pp. 751–2.

50 [1987] 1 Lloyds' L.R. 67 at p. 100.

51 Sub nom. La Banque Financière de la Cité SA (formerly Banque Keyser Ullman SA) v. Skandia Insurance Co. Ltd., The Times, 24 August 1988.

51a Hedley Byrne v. Heller [1964] A.C. 465.

52 [1986] 1 N.Z.L.R. 76.

53 Ibid., at p. 82.

54 Unreported (14 September 1987—Lexis transcript available).

55 [1986] 1 N.Z.L.R. 99.

56 Cf. Rowling v. Takaro Properties Ltd. [1988] 2 W.L.R. 418. Although this case does not directly conflict with either Brown or Craig, it does suggest that the Privy Council takes a dim view of the use of the law of negligence to challenge administrative decisions and that the latter decisions are of doubtful standing. Both cases were cited to the Privy Council in argument; neither was referred to in the judgment of the Judicial Committee. On the issues raised by these cases see Todd, Stephen, Public Authorities' Liability: The New Zealand Dimension (1987) 103 Law Quarterly Review 19Google Scholar.

57 [1986] 1 N.Z.L.R. 99 at p. 107.

58 A view shared by Todd, op. cit. at p. 23.

59 See, for example, Smith, op. cit.; Smith and Burns, op. cit.

60 Donoghue v. Stevenson [1932] A.C. 562 at p. 580.

61 Compare the views of Smith and Burns with, for example, those of Gibbs, C. J. in Sutherland Shire Council v. Heyman (1985) 157 C.L.R. 424Google Scholar.

62 See, for example, Curran v. Northern Ireland Housing Association Ltd. supra; Yuen Kun-yeu v. Att. -Gen. of Hong Kong supra; Rowling v. Takaro Properties Ltd. [1988] 2 W.L.R. 418.

63 See for example, the economic loss cases cited at note 2, supra.

64 Note 55, supra.

65 The fact that the discharge of the duty would not have been particularly onerous was taken into account in the Brown case: see [1986] 1 N. Z. L. R. 76 at p. 82.

66 The academic criticism has been led primarily by Smith and Burns, op. cit., but see also case notes by e.g., Buxton, Richard, “Built Upon Sand” (1978)Google Scholar 41 M.L.R. 85. For judicial criticism see, for example, Governors of the Peabody Foundation Fund v. Sir Lindsay Parkinson Ltd. [1985] A.C. 210; Leigh and Sillavan Ltd. v. Aliakmon Shipping Co. Ltd. [1986] A.C. 785; Curran v. Northern Ireland Co-Ownership Housing Association Ltd., supra.

67 Kidner, Richard, “Resiling From the Anns Principle: The Variable Nature of Proximity in Negligence” (1987) 7 Legal Studies 319 at p. 322CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

68 Yuen Kun-yeu v. Att. -Gen. of Hong Kong [1988] A.C. 175, per Lord Keith at p. 194. See also cases cited at footnote 66, supra.

69 Heuston and Buckley, op. cit., p. 221; Smillie, J. A., “Principle, Policy and Negligence”, (1984) 11 New Zealand Universities Law Review 111Google Scholar.

70 See, for example, Brennan J. in Sutherland Shire Council, supra at p. 481.

71 See, for example, Yuen Kun-yeu v. Att. -Gen. of Hong Kong, supra, per Lord Keith at pp. 710–11.

72 SeeLinden, Allen M., “Rescuers and Good Samaritans” (1971) 34 M.L.R. 247; Weinrib, op. cit.; Prosser, op. cit.; and works cited thereinGoogle Scholar.

73 Linden, op. cit.