Hughes v Lord Advocate
1963 Scottish delict case / From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Dear Wikiwand AI, let's keep it short by simply answering these key questions:
Can you list the top facts and stats about Hughes v Lord Advocate?
Summarize this article for a 10 year old
Hughes v Lord Advocate [1963] UKHL 31 is an important Scottish delict case decided by the House of Lords on causation. The case is also influential in negligence in the English law of tort (even though English law does not recognise "allurement" per se).
Hughes v Lord Advocate | |
---|---|
Court | House of Lords |
Decided | 21 February 1963 |
Citations | [1963] AC 837 [1963] 2 WLR 779 [1963] 1 All ER 705 1963 SC (HL) 31 |
Transcript | Full text of judgment |
Court membership | |
Judges sitting | Lord Reid Lord Morris of Borth-y-Gest Lord Guest Lord Jenkins Lord Pearce |
The case's main significance is that, after the shift within the common law of negligence from strict liability[1] to a reasonable standard of care,[2] this case advocated a middle way, namely:
- Even if the loss or harm is not itself foreseeable, liability may arise provided the actual loss falls with a "foreseeable class of harm".
This idea was neither developed nor expanded upon, and only one year later the claimant in Doughty v Turner Manufacturing obtained no remedy via this "middle way".[3][4] However, the case was followed in subsequent cases on occupiers' liability.