Study Notes

Key Case | Bourhill v Young (1943) | Negligence - Duty of Care & Foreseeability

Level:
A-Level, BTEC National
Board:
AQA, Edexcel, OCR, IB, Eduqas, WJEC

Last updated 30 Sept 2020

This case established that no duty of care is owed in negligence if the reasonable man would not foresee the risk of harm to the claimant.

CASE SUMMARY

Claimant: Mrs Bourhill - a heavily pregnant woman

Defendant: Mr Young - a motorcyclist

Facts: The claimant realised whilst disembarking a tram that there had been an accident nearby. She did not witness the initial incident but voluntarily approached the scene to witness the aftermath. As a result of viewing the scene the claimant suffered a stillbirth and sought a claim in negligence against the estate of the deceased motorcyclist.

Outcome: Not Liable

Legal principle: There was no duty of care owing from Mr Young to Mrs Bourhill as the requirement of foreseeability was not satisfied, the reasonable man in the position of the motorcyclist would not have foreseen that she would suffer some harm as a result of his actions.

© 2002-2024 Tutor2u Limited. Company Reg no: 04489574. VAT reg no 816865400.