Mullin V Richards
   HOME

TheInfoList



Click Here for Items Related To - Mullin V Richards
OR:
Mullin V Richards on:   [Wikipedia]   [Google]   [Amazon]

''Mullin v Richards''
998 Year 998 ( CMXCVIII) was a common year starting on Saturday (link will display the full calendar) of the Julian calendar. Events By place Europe * Spring – Otto III retakes Rome and restores power in the papal city. Crescenti ...
1 All ER 920 is a judgment of the
Court of Appeal of England and Wales The Court of Appeal (formally "His Majesty's Court of Appeal in England", commonly cited as "CA", "EWCA" or "CoA") is the highest court within the Courts of England and Wales#Senior Courts of England and Wales, Senior Courts of England and Wal ...
, dealing with liability of children under English law of negligence. The question in the case was what standard of behaviour could be expected of a child.


Facts

The
plaintiff A plaintiff ( Π in legal shorthand) is the party who initiates a lawsuit (also known as an ''action'') before a court. By doing so, the plaintiff seeks a legal remedy. If this search is successful, the court will issue judgment in favor of the p ...
and the
defendant In court proceedings, a defendant is a person or object who is the party either accused of committing a crime in criminal prosecution or against whom some type of civil relief is being sought in a civil case. Terminology varies from one jurisdic ...
, two female friends of fifteen years old, were fencing with plastic rulers in their classroom. One of the rulers shattered and a piece of plastic flew into the plaintiff girl's eye, partially depriving her of sight.


Judgment

The Court of Appeal found that the standard to be expected of a 15-year-old child was not the standard of a reasonable person, but that of a reasonable and "ordinarily prudent" 15-year-old. It was held that an ordinary prudent 15-year old could not have foreseen any injury when playing with rulers and the defendant was therefore found not liable in
negligence Negligence (Lat. ''negligentia'') is a failure to exercise appropriate and/or ethical ruled care expected to be exercised amongst specified circumstances. The area of tort law known as ''negligence'' involves harm caused by failing to act as a ...
.


See also

*
Standard of care in English law In English tort law, there can be no liability in negligence unless the claimant establishes both that they were owed a duty of care by the defendant, and that there has been a breach of that duty. The defendant is in breach of duty towards the ...
*
Breach of duty in English law In English tort law, there can be no liability in negligence unless the claimant establishes both that they were owed a duty of care by the defendant, and that there has been a breach of that duty. The defendant is in breach of duty towards the ...
*'' Blyth v Birmingham Waterworks'' *'' Bolam v Friern Hospital Management Committee'' *''
Wilsher v Essex Area Health Authority ''Wilsher v Essex Area Health Authority'' 988AC 1074 is an English tort law case concerning the "material increase of risk" test for causation. Facts The defendant hospital, initially acting through an inexperienced junior doctor, negligently ...
'' *''
Wells v Cooper ''Wells v. Cooper'' (1958) 2 All ER 527 is an England and Wales Court of Appeal judgment dealing with the issue of standard of care in English tort law. The question in the case was what standard of care could be expected of a person who carries ou ...
''


Notes

{{English law types English tort case law 1998 in case law 1998 in British law Court of Appeal (England and Wales) cases