header-logo header-logo

Cause & effect

30 May 2014 / Karen O’Sullivan
Issue: 7608 / Categories: Features , Personal injury
printer mail-detail
web_sullivanl

The issues of duty of care & causation have been under consideration again, notes Karen O’Sullivan

The Court of Appeal recently handed down judgment in an interesting case which re-visited issues of duty of care and causation, called Morcom v Biddick [2014] EWCA Civ 182, [2014] All ER (D) 248 (Feb).

The claimant, a long-time acquaintance of the elderly defendant, agreed to fit insulation to the defendant’s loft hatch. The claimant was a professional handyman who previously worked for the defendant, sometimes paid and sometimes not. The defendant was conscious of the risk of the hatch opening beneath his weight or due to the vibration of his drill. To counteract that, the defendant agreed to ensure that the latch stayed shut by holding it in the locked position using the pole used to lock and unlock the hatch. After some minutes, the telephone rang and the defendant left to answer it. During his short conversation, the loft hatch came open and the claimant fell through the hatch, sustaining serious injuries.

The likely cause

The

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Muckle LLP—Ella Johnson

Muckle LLP—Ella Johnson

Real estate dispute resolution team welcomes newly qualified solicitor

Morr & Co—Dennis Phillips

Morr & Co—Dennis Phillips

International private client team appoints expert in Spanish law

NLJ Career Profile: Stefan Borson, McCarthy Denning

NLJ Career Profile: Stefan Borson, McCarthy Denning

Stefan Borson, football finance expert head of sport at McCarthy Denning, discusses returning to the law digging into the stories behind the scenes

NEWS
Paper cyber-incident plans are useless once ransomware strikes, argues Jack Morris of Epiq in NLJ this week
In this week's NLJ, Robert Hargreaves and Lily Johnston of York St John University examine the Employment Rights Bill 2024–25, which abolishes the two-year qualifying period for unfair-dismissal claims
Writing in NLJ this week, Manvir Kaur Grewal of Corker Binning analyses the collapse of R v Óg Ó hAnnaidh, where a terrorism charge failed because prosecutors lacked statutory consent. The case, she argues, highlights how procedural safeguards—time limits, consent requirements and institutional checks—define lawful state power
Michael Zander KC, emeritus professor at LSE, revisits his long-forgotten Crown Court Study (1993), which surveyed 22,000 participants across 3,000 cases, in the first of a two-part series for NLJ
Getty Images v Stability AI Ltd [2025] EWHC 2863 (Ch) was a landmark test of how UK law applies to AI training—but does it leave key questions unanswered, asks Emma Kennaugh-Gallagher of Mewburn Ellis in NLJ this week
back-to-top-scroll