Chapter 11 Answer Diagram Unproblematic; damage caused was foreseeable Unproblematic; but for the breach no loss/injury would have been caused T can name Steamo as supplier to avoid liability Damage to other property only recoverable over £275 Well established between manufacturer and ultimate consumer (Donoghue v. Stevenson) Cuts and shattered cabinet Widely defined – includes the cleaner Thermostat was defective; reasonable to expect S to realise that absence of reasonable care would result in injury from steam/boiling water Cannot recover cost of product itself Consumer Protection Act 1987 Negligence Liability for defective products Duty Breach Causation Remoteness Damage Defect Faulty thermostat Claim v. Tatmart? Product Damages? Answers Diagram.indd 7 6/14/12 11:08 PM
Welcome message from author
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
Chapter 11 Answer Diagram
Unproblematic; damagecaused was foreseeable
Unproblematic; but for thebreach no loss/injury
would have been caused
T can name Steamoas supplier to avoid
liability
Damage to otherproperty only
recoverable over £275
Well established betweenmanufacturer and ultimate
consumer (Donoghuev. Stevenson)
Cuts and shatteredcabinet
Widely defined –includes the cleaner
Thermostat was defective;reasonable to expect S to
realise that absence ofreasonable care would resultin injury from steam/boiling
water
Cannot recover costof product itself
Consumer ProtectionAct 1987
Negligence
Liability fordefectiveproducts
Duty
Breach
Causation
Remoteness
Damage
Defect Faulty thermostat
Claim v. Tatmart?
Product
Damages?
Answers Diagram.indd 7 6/14/12 11:08 PM
Related Documents
