How do I answer a UK negligence problem question on duty, breach and causation?

For a UK tort law assignment, negligence is best handled as a sequence of legal hurdles. The claimant must show that the defendant owed a duty of care, breached that duty, caused the relevant damage, and that the damage was not too remote. The defendant may then raise defences such as contributory negligence.

This page is about academic legal writing, not legal advice. Real claims depend on full facts, evidence and current law.

What the question is asking

The question is not asking for a general essay on negligence. It is asking whether this claimant can establish each element on the facts. The marker wants issue spotting, legal authority, application and a reasoned conclusion. If one element is weak, say so. A balanced answer scores better than pretending every claim is certain.

Key concepts to cover

• Duty of care: whether the defendant was legally required to take reasonable care
• Breach: whether the defendant fell below the standard of reasonable care
• Factual causation: usually the "but for" question
• Legal causation and remoteness: whether the damage is legally attributable to the breach
• Defences: especially contributory negligence where the claimant also acted carelessly
• Remedy: usually damages, if liability is established
• IRAC: issue, rule, application and conclusion for each disputed point

Suggested answer structure

1. 1Identify the claimant, defendant and harm.
2. 2Deal with duty of care first, keeping it short if it is obvious.
3. 3Apply breach by comparing what happened with reasonable precautions.
4. 4Analyse causation: would the injury have happened without the breach?
5. 5Discuss remoteness and whether the type of harm was foreseeable.
6. 6Consider defences such as contributory negligence.
7. 7Give a cautious conclusion on liability and remedy.

Mini application example

Suppose a supermarket employee saw a leaking freezer but did not put out a warning sign or arrange cleaning for twenty minutes. A customer slipped and fractured a wrist.

Duty is likely to be straightforward because shops owe visitors a duty to take reasonable care for their safety. The stronger analysis is breach and causation. On breach, ask what a reasonable supermarket would have done once staff knew of the spill. A warning sign, temporary barrier or prompt cleaning may be reasonable precautions. On causation, ask whether the customer would probably have avoided the fall if those precautions had been taken.

Do not write only "there is negligence because someone was injured". Injury alone is not enough. The legal question is whether the defendant's unreasonable conduct caused legally recognised damage.

Common mistakes

• Spending half the answer on the history of negligence when duty is not disputed
• Treating foreseeability as the whole test for every duty question
• Forgetting breach and causation after establishing duty
• Using cases from another jurisdiction without explaining relevance
• Giving a definite conclusion where the facts are deliberately ambiguous
• Ignoring contributory negligence when the claimant ignored a visible warning or acted carelessly

How to make the answer stronger

Use IRAC in short cycles. Instead of writing all the law first and all the facts later, apply each rule immediately. For example: "The issue is breach. The standard is reasonable care in the circumstances. Here, the spill had been known for twenty minutes, the risk of slipping was obvious, and a warning sign was low cost. That points towards breach."

For public authority or emergency service scenarios, be more careful. Recent UK Supreme Court decisions stress the difference between making someone worse off and failing to protect them from harm. That distinction can matter in negligence problem questions involving police, rescue services or omissions.

Related questions

• How should I structure an answer to a contract law problem question?
• What is the difference between ratio decidendi and obiter dicta?
• How do I answer a UK contract formation problem question?
• How do I discuss breach of contract remedies in IRAC format?

Academic use note

This content is for legal education and assignment planning only. It is not legal advice. Students should follow the jurisdiction, cases and legislation required by their module.

Sources and further reading

• [Robinson v Chief Constable of West Yorkshire Police [2018] UKSC 4](https://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKSC/2018/4.html)
• Tindall v Chief Constable of Thames Valley Police, UK Supreme Court judgment
• Monash legal problem solving IRAC guidance