Extended Goldman v Hargrave to natural land movements, establishing that landowners must take reasonable steps to prevent naturally occurring land slippage from damaging neighbouring property. Confirmed the 'measured duty' principle in English law.

A woman claimed damages after allegedly finding a decomposed snail in a bottle of ginger beer, becoming ill as a result. This case established the modern law of negligence and the 'neighbour principle' - that we owe a duty of care to those who might reasonably be affected by our actions.

Contractual damages must be within reasonable contemplation of parties at contract formation.

Court establishes landmark test for recoverable damages in contract breach

Rylands v Fletcher established the rule of strict liability for damage caused by the escape of dangerous things accumulated on land. This landmark case created a new tort principle that makes landowners liable for harm caused by hazardous substances kept on their property, regardless of fault or negligence.

Claimants must reasonably mitigate loss but may benefit from successful mitigation.

House of Lords case that relaxed the test for factual causation where the defendant's negligence materially increased the risk of harm that actually occurred.

Unforeseeable chemical reaction made explosion damages too remote despite negligence.

This case established that employers can be vicariously liable for employees' intentional wrongdoing if there is a sufficiently close connection between the employment and the wrongful acts. The House of Lords held a care home liable for sexual abuse committed by a warden against residents.

Court establishes 'reasonable foreseeability' test for contractual damages

Wilkinson v Downton established the tort of intentionally causing physical harm through false statements without direct physical contact. The defendant falsely told the plaintiff that her husband had been seriously injured, causing her severe shock and physical illness, creating liability for intentional infliction of harm.

Defendants liable if type of harm foreseeable, even if manner unforeseeable

Mental distress damages require physical inconvenience and must be modest in amount.

The House of Lords held that there could be no liability under the rule in Rylands v Fletcher without an escape of the dangerous thing from the defendant's land, clarifying a key element of strict liability.

Mitigation duty requires reasonable steps but not complex litigation against third parties.

Landmark House of Lords decision establishing that public authorities can owe a duty of care in negligence to individuals who suffer harm as a direct result of the authority's carelessness in exercising statutory functions. The case extended Donoghue v Stevenson principles to public law contexts.

Hypothetical bargain damages available where traditional loss-based damages inadequate.

Contracting parties can recover substantial damages for third party property damage

Rose v Plenty established that an employer can be vicariously liable for an employee's actions even when those actions directly contravene express prohibitions, provided the wrongful act was committed in the course of employment. The case clarified the scope of vicarious liability in tort law.

A flooring specialist nominated by the building owner owed a duty of care in negligence for pure economic loss arising from defective workmanship, despite no contract between the parties. The House of Lords extended Donoghue v Stevenson and Anns, finding sufficient proximity based on the specialist's knowledge the floor was for the pursuer's use and reliance on their skill.

Frostbite injuries foreseeable consequence of prolonged cold exposure at work.

House of Lords case establishing that in medical negligence, claimants must prove causation on the balance of probabilities even where multiple potential causes exist.

Loss of chance must be substantial to ground contractual damages claim

Caparo established the modern three-stage test for determining when a duty of care exists in negligence: foreseeability, proximity, and whether it is fair, just and reasonable to impose a duty. The case concerned whether auditors owed a duty of care to potential investors who relied on company accounts. In Robinson v Chief Constable of West Yorkshire Police [2018] UKSC 4 the Supreme Court clarified that the three-stage framework is not a universal test and is relevant only in novel cases.

Murphy v Brentwood DC is a landmark House of Lords case that significantly restricted liability for pure economic loss in negligence. The case overruled Anns v Merton and established that local authorities owe no duty of care to building owners for economic loss caused by defective foundations, fundamentally reshaping the law of negligence in construction cases.

Cambridge Water concerned liability for environmental contamination where a leather manufacturer's chemical spillages polluted a water company's borehole. The House of Lords established that foreseeability of harm is required for both nuisance and Rylands v Fletcher liability, significantly limiting strict liability for environmental damage.

Refusal of reasonable alternative performance may constitute failure to mitigate loss.

Page v Smith established that a defendant owes a duty of care to avoid causing psychiatric injury to primary victims who are within the zone of physical danger, even if no physical injury occurs. The case clarified the distinction between primary and secondary victims in psychiatric injury claims.

Transferred malice doesn't apply when the type of harm differs from intended

Spring v Guardian Assurance established that employers owe a duty of care when providing employment references, requiring them to take reasonable care to ensure accuracy and avoid negligent misstatements. This landmark case extended the tort of negligence to employment references, balancing the need for honest references with protection against careless or malicious statements.

White v Jones established that solicitors can owe a duty of care to intended beneficiaries under a will when they fail to carry out testamentary instructions. This landmark case extended the tort of negligence to protect third parties who suffer loss due to a solicitor's breach of duty to their client.

Privity exception restricted: third party loss recovery limited to genuine agency.

Contractual damages should put innocent party in position as if contract performed.

No liability for damage to property already damaged by another tortfeasor.

Section 2(1) damages assessed on fraud basis, including all consequential losses.

Hidden vulnerabilities don't make unlawful act dangerous if unforeseeable to reasonable person

Mental distress damages available where peace of mind is important contractual object.

Supreme Court recasts SAAMCO and widens focus on scope of duty

Contracting parties can recover substantial damages despite suffering no direct loss

Nervous shock liability extends to 'immediate aftermath' of accidents

Pre-contractual representations can create collateral warranties and negligent misrepresentation liability.

Material property damage actionable in nuisance without proving unreasonableness.

Council liable for children's injuries from abandoned boat despite unforeseeable accident method

Pre-contract reliance expenditure recoverable as alternative to expectation damages when foreseeable.