FREESwaine vG NorthernRy Co[1864]TheWagonMoundNo.1Occupierdepended on1)Occupation,OR 2) control Sim vStretch[1935];s.1(1) of theDA 2013Andrea v Selfridge &Co Ltd [1938], Halseyv Esso Petroleum[1961], De Keyser’sRoyal Hotel v Spicer[194], Kennaway vThomson [1981]Yes,unders.1(3)OLA 1984 KennawayvThomson[1981]Cook vSquare[1992]CambridgeWater Co vEasternCountiesLeather plc[1994]Tetleyv Chitty[1986]FREETransco plc vStockportMetopolitanBoroughCouncil [2004] TangibleInterferenceIllegal activity(a defencewhere C isengaging inillegal activity)Bolton vStone;Castle v StAugustineLinks [1922]Smith vLeech-Brain & CoLtd [1962A defencewhere theblame for thedamage atissue isapportioned. Malone vLasky;Hunter vCanaryWharfFREE• The type ofdamage caused• The way in whichthe damage wascaused• The extent ofdamage caused A newintervening act– which is abreak in thechain ofcausationThat thedamage isunreasonableThe purposeof the tort ofprivatenuisanceBenjaminv Storr[1874]Voluntaryassumptionofrisk/consentas a defenceHughes vLordAdvocate[1963]Wilsons vClydeCoal[1938]S.2(4)(a)Provides adefinitionfor privatenuisance1. Provision ofcompetent staff ofmen;2. Adequate plant andequipment;3. An effective system;and4. A safe place of work FREESwaine vG NorthernRy Co[1864]TheWagonMoundNo.1Occupierdepended on1)Occupation,OR 2) control Sim vStretch[1935];s.1(1) of theDA 2013Andrea v Selfridge &Co Ltd [1938], Halseyv Esso Petroleum[1961], De Keyser’sRoyal Hotel v Spicer[194], Kennaway vThomson [1981]Yes,unders.1(3)OLA 1984 KennawayvThomson[1981]Cook vSquare[1992]CambridgeWater Co vEasternCountiesLeather plc[1994]Tetleyv Chitty[1986]FREETransco plc vStockportMetopolitanBoroughCouncil [2004] TangibleInterferenceIllegal activity(a defencewhere C isengaging inillegal activity)Bolton vStone;Castle v StAugustineLinks [1922]Smith vLeech-Brain & CoLtd [1962A defencewhere theblame for thedamage atissue isapportioned. Malone vLasky;Hunter vCanaryWharfFREE• The type ofdamage caused• The way in whichthe damage wascaused• The extent ofdamage caused A newintervening act– which is abreak in thechain ofcausationThat thedamage isunreasonableThe purposeof the tort ofprivatenuisanceBenjaminv Storr[1874]Voluntaryassumptionofrisk/consentas a defenceHughes vLordAdvocate[1963]Wilsons vClydeCoal[1938]S.2(4)(a)Provides adefinitionfor privatenuisance1. Provision ofcompetent staff ofmen;2. Adequate plant andequipment;3. An effective system;and4. A safe place of work 

Tortious Bingo - Call List

(Print) Use this randomly generated list as your call list when playing the game. There is no need to say the BINGO column name. Place some kind of mark (like an X, a checkmark, a dot, tally mark, etc) on each cell as you announce it, to keep track. You can also cut out each item, place them in a bag and pull words from the bag.


1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
  1. FREE
  2. Swaine v G Northern Ry Co [1864]
  3. The Wagon Mound No.1
  4. Occupier depended on 1) Occupation, OR 2) control
  5. Sim v Stretch [1935]; s.1(1) of the DA 2013
  6. Andrea v Selfridge & Co Ltd [1938], Halsey v Esso Petroleum [1961], De Keyser’s Royal Hotel v Spicer [194], Kennaway v Thomson [1981]
  7. Yes, under s.1(3) OLA 1984
  8. Kennaway v Thomson [1981]
  9. Cook v Square [1992]
  10. Cambridge Water Co v Eastern Counties Leather plc [1994]
  11. Tetley v Chitty [1986]
  12. FREE
  13. Transco plc v Stockport Metopolitan Borough Council [2004]
  14. Tangible Interference
  15. Illegal activity (a defence where C is engaging in illegal activity)
  16. Bolton v Stone; Castle v St Augustine Links [1922]
  17. Smith v Leech-Brain & Co Ltd [1962
  18. A defence where the blame for the damage at issue is apportioned.
  19. Malone v Lasky; Hunter v Canary Wharf
  20. FREE
  21. • The type of damage caused • The way in which the damage was caused • The extent of damage caused
  22. A new intervening act – which is a break in the chain of causation
  23. That the damage is unreasonable
  24. The purpose of the tort of private nuisance
  25. Benjamin v Storr [1874]
  26. Voluntary assumption of risk/consent as a defence
  27. Hughes v Lord Advocate [1963]
  28. Wilsons v Clyde Coal [1938]
  29. S.2(4)(a)
  30. Provides a definition for private nuisance
  31. 1. Provision of competent staff of men; 2. Adequate plant and equipment; 3. An effective system; and 4. A safe place of work