Skip to content
MarkSchemeMarkScheme
Sign up — no card

9084 · 4.1.3

Breach of duty — practice questions

Practice and worked examples for 9084 Breach of duty. Short previews only — attempt the full question in MarkScheme against the official scheme.

Worked example 1

During a village cricket match, a batsman hits a ball that flies over a 17-foot fence, travels 100 yards, and injures Miss Stone walking on a nearby road. The club has played there for 70 years with only six balls leaving the ground. Has the club breached its duty of care? [12 marks]

Show solution outline

Duty assumed (occupier/organiser to spectators and passers-by). Issue: breach?

Standard: Reasonable person organising a cricket match (Blyth v Birmingham).

Risk assessment (Bolton v Stone facts):

  • Likelihood: Ball leaving ground was rare — only six times in 70 years; probability very low.
  • Severity: Injury from a cricket ball could be serious (head injury).
  • Cost of precautions: Raising fence height, netting, or stopping play — practicable but not free.

Held in Bolton v Stone: No breach — probability so low that reasonable person would not require extra precautions; social utility of village cricket weighed in balance.

Application: On identical facts, club likely not in breach. If balls had been hit out frequently, or children played nearer the boundary, conclusion may differ.

Contrast Paris v Stepney: Claimant's special vulnerability (one eye) increased severity of risk — employer breach found. Here, Miss Stone had no special vulnerability affecting the calculus.

Worked example 2

A factory floor becomes flooded and slippery. To guarantee safety, the factory must be shut down, costing £50,000 in lost production. The manager estimates the risk of a serious slip-and-fall injury is 1 in 1,000 (0.001). The average compensation for such an injury is £100,000. The manager spreads all available sawdust, which reduces the risk, but an employee is still injured. Using a risk/cost analysis, was the factory owner in breach for not closing the factory?

Show solution outline

The issue is whether the defendant fell below the standard of a reasonable employer by failing to take a specific precaution (closing the factory). This involves balancing the cost of the precaution against the likelihood and severity of the risk, as in Latimer v AEC Ltd.

Step 1: Identify the variables for the balancing exercise.

  • Cost of Precaution (Burden, B): The cost of eliminating the risk by closing the factory is £50,000.
  • Probability of Harm (P): The likelihood of a serious injury is given as 1 in 1,000, or 0.001.
  • Severity of Harm (Loss, L): The financial cost of a serious injury is £100,000.

Step 2: Calculate the 'expected cost' of the risk. This calculation monetises the risk, allowing for a direct comparison with the cost of the precaution.

  • Formula: Expected Cost = P × L
  • Calculation: 0.001 × £100,000 = £100

Step 3: Compare the cost of the precaution with the expected cost of the risk.

  • Cost of Precaution (B) = £50,000
  • Expected Cost of Risk (P × L) = £100

Step 4: Conclude on Breach. The cost of the precaution (£50,000) is significantly greater than the monetised risk (£100). A reasonable employer would not be expected to incur such a disproportionate expense to eliminate a small risk, especially when other reasonable steps (spreading sawdust) were taken. Following the principle in Latimer v AEC Ltd, the defendant has likely met the standard of care and is not in breach of duty.

Mark a 9084 question on this topicFull lessonOpen in course studio