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

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