Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 592 views

    Eggshell Skull: Smith V Leech Brain (1962) 2 QB 405

    Uploaded by

    Rachit Munjal
    The eggshell skull rule is a legal doctrine in tort law where a defendant is liable for all damages resulting from their negligent actions that cause injury to a plaintiff, even if the plaintiff had a pre-existing medical condition that made the injuries more severe. The rule holds that the defendant must take the victim as they find them. Two cases are described where the rule was applied - in Smith v Leech Brain, a man died of cancer years after receiving a burn at work due to the employer's negligence, and in Page v Smith, a car accident triggered chronic ME in the plaintiff even though they were not physically injured in the collision.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Eggshell Skull: Smith V Leech Brain (1962) 2 QB 405

    Uploaded by

    Rachit Munjal
    592 views2 pages
    The eggshell skull rule is a legal doctrine in tort law where a defendant is liable for all damages resulting from their negligent actions that cause injury to a plaintiff, even if the plaintiff had a pre-existing medical condition that made the injuries more severe. The rule holds that the defendant must take the victim as they find them. Two cases are described where the rule was applied - in Smith v Leech Brain, a man died of cancer years after receiving a burn at work due to the employer's negligence, and in Page v Smith, a car accident triggered chronic ME in the plaintiff even though they were not physically injured in the collision.

    Original Description:

    egg shell theory of Law of Tort

    Original Title

    Egg shell theory

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The eggshell skull rule is a legal doctrine in tort law where a defendant is liable for all damages resulting from their negligent actions that cause injury to a plaintiff, even if the plaintiff had a pre-existing medical condition that made the injuries more severe. The rule holds that the defendant must take the victim as they find them. Two cases are described where the rule was applied - in Smith v Leech Brain, a man died of cancer years after receiving a burn at work due to the employer's negligence, and in Page v Smith, a car accident triggered chronic ME in the plaintiff even though they were not physically injured in the collision.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    592 views2 pages

    Eggshell Skull: Smith V Leech Brain (1962) 2 QB 405

    Uploaded by

    Rachit Munjal
    The eggshell skull rule is a legal doctrine in tort law where a defendant is liable for all damages resulting from their negligent actions that cause injury to a plaintiff, even if the plaintiff had a pre-existing medical condition that made the injuries more severe. The rule holds that the defendant must take the victim as they find them. Two cases are described where the rule was applied - in Smith v Leech Brain, a man died of cancer years after receiving a burn at work due to the employer's negligence, and in Page v Smith, a car accident triggered chronic ME in the plaintiff even though they were not physically injured in the collision.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    You are on page 1of 2

    Eggshell skull

    The eggshell skull rule (or thin skull rule or you take your victim as you find him rule of the
    common law) is a well-establishedlegal doctrine used in some tort law systems,[1] with a similar
    doctrine applicable to criminal law. It means that frailty of the injured person is not a defense in a
    tort case.

    This rule holds that a tortfeasor is liable for all consequences resulting from his or her tortious
    (usually negligent) activities leading to an injury to another person, even if the victim suffers an
    unusually high level of damage (e.g. due to a pre-existing vulnerability ormedical condition). The
    term implies that if a person had a skull as delicate as that of the shell of an egg, and a tortfeasor
    who was unaware of the condition injured that person's head, causing the skull unexpectedly to
    break, the defendant would be held liable for all damages resulting from the wrongful contact,
    even if the tortfeasor did not intend to cause such a severe injury.

    The doctrine is applied in all areas of torts - intentional torts, negligence, and strict liability cases as well as in criminal law. There is no requirement of physical contact with the victim - if
    a trespasser's wrongful presence on the victim's property so terrifies the victim that he has a
    fatal heart attack, the trespasser will be liable for the damages stemming from his original tort.
    The foundation for this rule is based primarily on policy grounds. The courts do not want the
    defendant or accused to rely on the victim's own vulnerability to avoid liability.

    Smith v Leech Brain [1962] 2 QB 405


    A widow brought a claim against the defendant under the Fatal Accidents
    Act for the death of her husband. The defendant employed the husband.
    As a result of their negligence he incurred a burn to his lip. The lip
    contained pre-cancerous cells which were triggered by the injury
    sustained. He died three years later from cancer.
    Held:
    The burn was a foreseeable consequence of the defendant's negligence
    and this resulted in the death. The defendant was liable for his death. It
    was not necessary to show that death by cancer was foreseeable, nor that
    an ordinary person would not have died from the injury. The egg shell
    skull rule applies and the defendant must take his victim as he finds him.

    Page v Smith [1996] 1 AC 155 House of Lords

    The claimant had suffered from ME over a period of time and was in
    recovery when he was involved in a minor car accident due to the
    defendant's negligence. The claimant was not physically injured in the
    collision but the incident triggered his ME and had become chronic and
    permanent so that he was unable to return to his job as a teacher. He was
    successful at his trial and awarded 162,000 in damages.
    Held:
    Provided some kind of personal injury was foreseeable it did not matter
    whether the injury was physical or psychiatric. There was thus no need to
    establish that psychiatric injury was foreseeable. Also the fact that an
    ordinary person would not have suffered the injury incurred by the
    claimant was irrelevant as the defendant must take his victim as he finds
    him under the thin skull rule.

    You might also like