likely to injure your neighbour. Who, then, in law, is my neighbour? The answer seems to be persons who are so closely and directly affected by my act that I ought reasonably to have them in contemplation as being so affected when I am directing my mind to the acts or omissions which are called into question.” The tort of negligence consists of three fundamentals; duty of care, breach of duty, causation and remoteness of the damage.

Mike

In the case in question, Mike fell down the stairs due to the negligence of the pub. The Compensation Act 2006 section 1, states that “considering a claim in negligence or breach of statutory duty, a court may determine whether the defendant should have taken particular steps to meet a standard of care (whether by taking precautions or otherwise).” This act imposes obligations on the Grumpy Badger Pub in terms of taking precautions of their safety measures, as well as, preventing slips and trips. The management at the pub are liable as they have failed to provide a safe environment nor, had adequate warning signs to prevent harm from the stairs. Hence, there has a been a breach of negligence. However, the Occupier’s Liability Act (1957) also outlines the duty of care that provides a safe environment for the staff and customers at the premises. Therefore, the pub’s negligence was the underlying cause of Mike’s injuries.

The junior doctor Wally believed his injuries were merely external but, had serious internal injuries to his kidney and liver. The standard duty of care of a doctor towards the patients is an established duty. As a doctor Wally advised Mike to go home and rest. There is exposure that Wally is in breach of liability. In the case of Bolam v Friern , the House of Lords stated, “a medical professional is not guilty of negligence if he has acted in accordance with a practice accepted as proper by a responsible body of medical men skilled in that particular art.” According to medical negligence, he failed to take medical history of Mike knowing he suffers from liver and kidney damage. He also, failed to carry out medical investigation in terms of scans, blood tests despite knowing the severity of his internal injuries. Most importantly, Mike was not admitted for medical attention but, Wally sent him home. This imposes negligent measures on Wally as he did not act according to the medical practice.