Landmark Cases in the Law of Tort
C Mitchell, Paul Mitchell
Bloomsbury Publishing, Feb 18, 2010 - Law - 400 pages
Landmark Cases in the Law of Tort contains thirteen original essays on leading tort cases, ranging from the early nineteenth century to the present day. It is the third volume in a series of collected essays on landmark cases (the previous two volumes having dealt with restitution and contract). The cases examined raise a broad range of important issues across the law of tort, including such diverse areas as acts of state and public nuisance, as well as central questions relating to the tort of negligence. Several of the essays place cases in their historical context in ways that change our understanding of the case's significance. Sometimes the focus is on drawing out previously neglected aspects of cases which have been – undeservedly – assigned minor importance. Other essays explore the judicial methodologies and techniques that worked to shape leading principles of tort law.
So much of tort law turns on cases, and there are so many cases, that all but the most recent decisions have a tendency to become reduced to terse propositions of law, so as to keep the subject manageable. This collection shows how important it is, despite the constant temptation to compression, not to lose sight of the contexts and nuances which qualify and illuminate so many leading authorities.
2 Burón v Denman 1848
3 George v Skivington 1869
4 Daniel v Metropolitan Railway Company 1871
5 Woodley v Metropolitan District Railway Company 1877
6 Cavalier v Pope 1906
7 Hedley Byrne Co Ltd v Heller Partners Ltd 1963
8 Goldman v Hargrave 1967
Other editions - View all
accident action Alcock analysis Appeal applied approach argued argument arise authority breach British building caused cited claim claimant clear common law concerned consideration considered continued contract Court Court of Appeal created damage danger decided decision defendant Denman discussion duty economic effect English established European evidence example existence fact failed fire foreseeability George given Goldman harm held House of Lords Ibid important imposed injury interests issue judges judgment land later liability limited London loss nature negligence nervous shock noted nuisance occupier owed Oxford particular parties person plaintiff planning position powers premises principle question Railway reasonable recognised reference regarded relationship reported respect responsibility result risk rule seems slave slave trade Smith South Yorkshire statutory suffered suggested taken Tate took tort tort law University