Which element must be present for a duty of care to be established?

Which element must be present for a duty of care to be established?

• A. Intent to benefit
• B. Identification of the neighbour
• C. Reasonable foreseeability
• D. Written contracts

Answer: (C)

For a duty of care to be established, reasonable foreseeability is a fundamental element. This concept was articulated in the landmark case of Donoghue v. Stevenson, where it was determined that a person owes a duty of care to those who are closely and directly affected by their actions. Reasonable foreseeability implies that a person should be able to predict or anticipate that their actions could likely cause harm to others, thus establishing a relationship where a duty of care exists. The identification of the neighbour pertains to recognizing who is affected by one’s actions, which is important but is not sufficient on its own for establishing a duty of care without the element of foreseeability. Similarly, intent to benefit is not a requisite for duty of care; one can owe a duty to another without any intent to provide a benefit. Written contracts also do not play a role in the general principles of duty of care unless the situation specifically hinges on a contractual obligation, which is outside the realm of common law duty of care principles. Therefore, reasonable foreseeability remains vital as it underpins the very existence of a duty of care in negligence claims.

For a duty of care to be established, reasonable foreseeability is a fundamental element. This concept was articulated in the landmark case of Donoghue v. Stevenson, where it was determined that a person owes a duty of care to those who are closely and directly affected by their actions. Reasonable foreseeability implies that a person should be able to predict or anticipate that their actions could likely cause harm to others, thus establishing a relationship where a duty of care exists.

The identification of the neighbour pertains to recognizing who is affected by one’s actions, which is important but is not sufficient on its own for establishing a duty of care without the element of foreseeability. Similarly, intent to benefit is not a requisite for duty of care; one can owe a duty to another without any intent to provide a benefit. Written contracts also do not play a role in the general principles of duty of care unless the situation specifically hinges on a contractual obligation, which is outside the realm of common law duty of care principles. Therefore, reasonable foreseeability remains vital as it underpins the very existence of a duty of care in negligence claims.