FE-1 Tort Law 1 — Questions and Answers
Question 1: What are the four elements that a plaintiff must prove to succeed in a negligence claim in Irish law?
- Duty of care, breach of that duty, causation, and damage that is not too remote (Correct answer)
- Intention, action, damage, and proximity
- Fault, harm, knowledge, and foreseeability only
- Contract, negligence, damage, and mitigation
Correct answer: Duty of care, breach of that duty, causation, and damage that is not too remote
Following Donoghue v Stevenson [1932] and developed in Irish law, the plaintiff must establish: (1) the defendant owed a duty of care, (2) the defendant breached the standard expected, (3) the breach caused the damage, and (4) the damage is not too remote.
Question 2: What is the neighbour principle as stated by Lord Atkin in Donoghue v Stevenson [1932]?
- You must take reasonable care to avoid acts or omissions which you can reasonably foresee would be likely to injure your neighbour — persons closely and directly affected by your act (Correct answer)
- Neighbours owe each other absolute liability in tort
- The principle applies only to physical proximity between parties
- The neighbour principle has been replaced by the three-part test in Caparo Industries [1990]
Correct answer: You must take reasonable care to avoid acts or omissions which you can reasonably foresee would be likely to injure your neighbour — persons closely and directly affected by your act
Lord Atkin's neighbour principle forms the foundation of the duty of care: duty arises where harm to the claimant is reasonably foreseeable and the claimant is 'closely and directly affected' by the defendant's acts — the neighbour in law.
Question 3: What is the standard of care applied in negligence under Irish law?
- The standard of the reasonable person — an objective standard assessed from the position of a reasonable person in the defendant's position with the same expertise (Correct answer)
- The standard of the actual defendant's personal capabilities
- A subjective test based on what the defendant genuinely believed was safe
- The highest possible standard of care regardless of practicality
Correct answer: The standard of the reasonable person — an objective standard assessed from the position of a reasonable person in the defendant's position with the same expertise
Irish negligence law applies the objective 'reasonable person' standard (the man on the Clapham omnibus). For professionals, the standard is that of a reasonably competent professional in that field — the Bolam test adjusted for Irish law.
Question 4: What is the res ipsa loquitur doctrine in Irish tort law?
- The thing speaks for itself — where an accident would not ordinarily occur without negligence, it raises an inference of negligence that the defendant must rebut (Correct answer)
- Absolute liability for dangerous activities without proof of negligence
- The plaintiff need not prove any element of their claim if they were injured
- The doctrine applies only in product liability cases
Correct answer: The thing speaks for itself — where an accident would not ordinarily occur without negligence, it raises an inference of negligence that the defendant must rebut
Res ipsa loquitur applies where: the damage was caused by something under the defendant's control, the accident is of a kind that does not normally happen without negligence, and there is no explanation for the accident. It raises an evidential inference of breach.
Question 5: Under the Civil Liability Act 1961, how are multiple tortfeasors liable for the same damage in Ireland?
- Concurrent wrongdoers are jointly and severally liable — the plaintiff can sue any or all of them for the full amount, though apportionment of contribution between them is determined by degree of fault (Correct answer)
- Each tortfeasor is only liable for their proportionate share
- The plaintiff must sue all tortfeasors together in the same action
- The last tortfeasor to contribute to the damage bears sole liability
Correct answer: Concurrent wrongdoers are jointly and severally liable — the plaintiff can sue any or all of them for the full amount, though apportionment of contribution between them is determined by degree of fault
Under the Civil Liability Act 1961, concurrent wrongdoers are jointly and severally liable to the plaintiff for the full damage. The plaintiff can recover in full from any defendant. The defendants settle contribution between themselves based on their respective degrees of fault.
Question 6: What is the defence of volenti non fit injuria in Irish tort law?
- A complete defence where the plaintiff freely and voluntarily assumed the legal risk of the harm — the plaintiff must have agreed to take the risk of negligence, not merely the risk of the activity (Correct answer)
- Contributory negligence reducing the plaintiff's damages
- A defence that the plaintiff had no legal capacity to sue
- The doctrine that danger inherent in sport cannot be tortious
Correct answer: A complete defence where the plaintiff freely and voluntarily assumed the legal risk of the harm — the plaintiff must have agreed to take the risk of negligence, not merely the risk of the activity
Volenti requires genuine voluntary consent to the legal risk of negligent conduct, not merely knowledge of a physical risk. Mere knowledge of danger (scienti) is not volenti. The defence is interpreted narrowly in Irish law and is rarely successful.
FE-1 Tort Law 1
What are the four elements that a plaintiff must prove to succeed in a negligence claim in Irish law?