The final part the court will look at is did D have the Mens Rea for the unlawful act. The MR for the unlawful act does not need to be intended .For example in Newbury and Jones. N and J are two teenage boys .They pushed a paving stone off a railway bridge on to the train below, causing …show more content…
Once it has been decided that D owns the claimant a duty of care the claimant must also show that D was in breach of duty. The test of breach of duty is usually objective but could change slightly .An example of this is in the case study of Nettleship v Weston .A learner driver had an accident and injured her passenger.The driver was expected to drive like a qualified driver. Her inexperience was not necessary. There is no doubt that you breached his duty by not acting when told someone was