Ratio Decidendi
The social utility of the defendant's activity is a relevant factor in assessing breach of duty. Where the activity has high social value (such as emergency rescue), a greater degree of risk may be acceptable.
حقائق
A fireman was injured by a heavy jack sliding in a vehicle that was not designed to carry it. The jack was urgently needed to rescue a woman trapped under a vehicle. The fire station did not have a suitable vehicle available at the time.
فیصلے کا خلاصہ
The Court of Appeal held that the fire authority was not negligent. In deciding whether the employer had taken reasonable care, the risk to the firefighter from the unsecured heavy jack had to be weighed against the object to be achieved — here, saving the life of a woman trapped under a vehicle. Denning LJ held that the saving of life or limb justifies taking considerable risk, and that the commercial calculus which would apply to an ordinary profit-making enterprise does not apply where the end in view is an emergency rescue. Because the jack was urgently needed and no suitable vehicle was available, sending it on the lorry actually used was a reasonable response to the emergency, and the resulting injury did not amount to a breach of duty. The case establishes that the social utility or purpose of the defendant's conduct is a relevant factor in the breach calculus — a principle now reflected in s.1 of the Compensation Act 2006.
اہم اقتباسات
"The saving of life or limb justifies taking considerable risk."
— Denning LJ
"One must balance the risk against the end to be achieved. If this accident had occurred in a commercial enterprise without any emergency there could be no doubt that the servant would succeed."
— Denning LJ
بعد کا علاج
Authority on the relevance of social utility in assessing breach. Now reflected in the Compensation Act 2006, s.1.
What To Do Next
Step-by-Step Guides
Know Your Rights
Get Professional Help