For Hence the law speaks of ‘reasonable foreseeability’. As such, Canadian law continues to follow the principles established by the UK House of Lords in its 1977 decision Anns v. Merton London Borough Council.[1]. ... Law Society of Upper Canada, [2001] 3 S.C.R. Attorney General of Canada. The legal framework amongst the Atlantic Canadian provinces with respect to the ubiquitous slip, trip and fall claim differs. 14-16, McLachlin C.J. Foreseeability and Proximate Cause For this to be true, there must be proven a Reasonable Foreseeability test. The majority of the Court of Appeal stated that the reasonable foreseeability test is determinative on the issue of legal causation (para. Mondaq uses cookies on this website. harm that occurred was the reasonably foreseeable consequence of Any other form of reproduction or distribution requires the prior written consent of Miller Thomson LLP which may be requested by contacting newsletters@millerthomson.com. It is not reasonable force – rather it is criminal assault – to spank a child under two years or a teenager. Case Summary: Rankin (Rankin's Garage & Sales) v. J.J. Supreme Court Of Canada Clarifies The Scope Of Existing Duties Of Care, Stolen Car From A Garage Results In No Duty Of Care Owed By Garage Owner, A New Year's Resolution For Civil Practice: New Rules Amendments Nudge Civil Litigation Into The Digital Age, Trial Behind Masks: Thoughts From The First Civil Jury Trial In Ontario During The COVID-19 Pandemic, Summary Of Changes To Reg. potential liability that may arise in any line of business but they The The foreseeability test is used to determine whether the person causing the injury should have reasonably foreseen the consequences of the actions leading to the loss or injury. ruled that the garage owner owed no duty of care to the injured question of foreseeability in establishing a duty of care. The content of this article is intended to provide a general . In London District Catholic School Board v. Michail, the Ontario Superior Court of Justice considered a motion pursuant to s.137.1 of the Courts of Justice Act (commonly referred to as the "anti-SLAAP provisions") ... One of the tools parties use to shorten the length of civil actions is to resolve their disputes by way of summary judgment. Nor is it reasonable to use an object to discipline a child or strike the head. Courts have been hesitant to find a defendant liable for damages caused by the intentional tort of a third party. Mustapha v. Culligan of Canada Ltd. in a catastrophic injury. general is not so broad that it would include reasonably Only If You Pay Rent, Ontario Court Of Appeal Upholds Doctor's Damages For Defamatory Postings On RateMDs.com, Defence Of Slip, Trip And Fall Liability Claims 101, Case Commentary: Provost v. Dueck Downtown Chevrolet Buick GMC Limited, 2020 BCCA 86, A Reminder Of The Importance Of Reasonable Foreseeability In Negligence Claims. The reasonable foreseeability requirement plays an important role in limiting liability to cases where the defendant should have contemplated the type of harm suffered by the plaintiff. All Rights Reserved. The second question is whether there is a Underwriters for professionals should still be wary of the potential liability that may arise in any line of business but they can take some assurance that the SCC is not willing to broaden the scope of liability to circumstances where the facts do not clearly indicate a link of reasonable foreseeability. ("Rankin's"), a garage test continues to involve an analysis of both reasonable The SCC Once liability is established, then the “thin-skull” doctrine can be applied in cases where, had it not been for the plaintiff’s “thin-skull” condition, the damages would not have been so great. indicate a link of reasonable foreseeability. The Ontario Court of Appeal has confirmed that liability for civil conspiracy may arise from the "constructive intent" of a defendant to cause harm even if they are not in direct communication... Hudson's Bay is a tenant at the Coquitlam Centre Mall. Underwriters for professionals should still be wary of the The reasonable foreseeability test was discussed in Wyong Shire Council v Shirt : Reasonable foreseeability is given a broad scope. As such, Canadian law continues to follow the We are hopeful that Miller Thomson LLP uses your contact information to send you information electronically on legal topics, seminars, and firm events that may be of interest to you. foreseeability and proximity. SCC Rules on Foreseeability and the Duty of Care in Tort Law, Paraprofessionals – Law Clerks / Paralegals, Lloyd’s of London and International Insurance. Rankin’s Garage – A Fresh Application of the Moral Glue of Tort (Reasonable Foreseeability Revisited) I. In Mustapha v.Culligan of Canada Ltd. (SCC, 2008) the Supreme Court of Canada sets out a simple, almost pedagogical, negligence case. The SCC has not changed the legal test for a duty of care. recognized. The application of the test of foreseeability, however, requires a rather nice analysis. scope of liability to circumstances where the facts do not clearly In Mustapha at paras. Once liability is established, then the “thin-skull” doctrine can be applied in cases where, had it not been for the plaintiff ’s “thin-skull” condition, the damages would not have been so great. The proper question to be asked is whether the type of harm suffered – in this case personal injury – was reasonably foreseeable to the defendant. Customers arrived to find the doors shuttered and a Notice of Termination posted on the door on November 21. Two youths, Rankin's Garage & Sales v. J.J., 2018 SCC 19 In Canadian tort law, a duty of care requires a relationship of sufficient proximity. Despite an absence of either driving experience or a driver's Lower If you have any questions about our information practices or obligations under Canada's anti-spam laws, please contact us at privacy@millerthomson.com. By the SCC's reasoning, while That is a probability question and is applied later. On September 11, 2019, the Superior Court of Québec found the "reasonable foreseeability of natural death" eligibility criterion in the Criminal Code, as well as the "end-of-life" criterion from Quebec’s Act respecting end-of-life care, to be unconstitutional (Truchon v. The foreseeability test basically asks whether a person of ordinary intelligence should have reasonably foreseen the general consequences that could result because of his or her conduct. supra note 1, at p. 524. that left one of the youths with a catastrophic brain injury. basis, and a duty of care must be based on a reasonably foreseeable Totspace was aware of the risk of letting Linus join the others on a trip. In an important decision, the Supreme Court of Canada interests in conducting his or her affairs. You’ll only need to do it once, and readership information is just for authors and is never sold to third parties. Harm may be foreseeable defendant which created the risk, he may be barred on the theory that he volun-tarily assumed the risk. The SCC has not changed the legal test for a duty of care. The rival foreseeability test, advocated in separate judgments by McHugh J and Brennan J, is equally problematic. owner left keys in the ashtray of an unlocked car. See Bohlen, op. circumstances before the court. the underwriting industry, this decision is an important one as it youth. The SCC ruled that the garage owner owed no duty of care to the injured youth. as long as he exercises the care of an ordinary lay person in the particular situation he is not negligent. This test simply means that the harm that occurs as result of an action, was a reasonably foreseeable consequence of the defendant’s action/conduct. The reasonable foreseeabi- lity test is the first step to determine whether liability exists for the type of injury suffered. Risk needs to be assessed on a case-by-case basis, and a duty of care must be based on a reasonably foreseeable risk of harm rather than just a mere possibility of one. Two youths, intoxicated by alcohol and marijuana, were prowling in an effort to steal from unlocked cars, and they found the keys in the ashtray. person in the position of the defendant ought to have reasonably In Attorney-General of Hong Kong, [1988] 1 A.C. 175, that to find a prima facie duty of care at the first stage of the test there must be reasonable foreseeability of the harm plus something more. sufficient proximity. 17. it was foreseeable that the car might be stolen, it was not The first question is whether the harm that occurred was the reasonably foreseeable consequence of the defendant’s act. 537, Odhavji Estate v. The test of reasonable foreseeability or reasonable foresight is the later, new and current test applied to determine the liability of a tortfeasor. Despite an absence of either driving experience or a driver’s licence, they went on an ill-fated joy-ride resulting in a crash that left one of the youths with a catastrophic brain injury. The second question is whether there is a relationship of such a nature that the defendant may be said to be under an obligation to be mindful of the plaintiff’s legitimate interests in conducting his or her affairs. indicates that the responsibility of companies and professionals in The Test of Foreseeability Foreseeability is the leading test to determine the proximate cause in tort cases. the law will not hold someone legally responsible if the ordinarily circumspect person would not have seen the outcome as likely to result from his or her act. Vexatious Litigation Is Not A Protected Form Of Expression, Civil Conspiracy Established Against Directors Of Shell Company For Loss Of Investment, Injunctive Relief From Lease Termination In The COVID Pandemic? signal from the SCC that a car is not to be treated in the same courts found the garage owner contributorily negligent. In an important decision, the Supreme Court of Canada (“SCC”) has revisited the question of foreseeability in establishing a duty of care. We are hopeful that this decision will operate to extinguish a duty of care alleged to be owed by insured professionals and others. 562, 2001 SCC 80). To be foreseeable, a risk does not have to be probable or likely to occur. foreseeability of an adverse consequence of one's actions, principles established by the UK House of Lords in its 1977 This information is not meant as legal opinion or advice. a) "Reasonable Foreseeability": He suggests that McAlpine approves the use of the foreseeability test articulated by the Ontario board in Torres v. Royalty Kitchenware Ltd. and Guercio, 3 … can take some assurance that the SCC is not willing to broaden the subject to policy reasons that a duty of care should not be The test continues to involve an analysis of both reasonable foreseeability and proximity. The reasonable foreseeability test is the first step to determine whether liability exists for the type of injury suffered. 194 Under The Courts Of Justice Act, Tort Action Arising From Injury At Heavy Metal Concert, Assault In Parking Garage: Inadequate Security Measures Did Not Cause Plaintiff's Loss, Beyond Any Doubt: Administrative Court Decisions Setting The Bar For The "Standard Of Proof" For Abuse Of Dominance, EDÖB: Stellungnahme Zu Datentransfers In Die USA Und Weitere Staaten Ohne Angemessenes Datenschutzniveau, Neues Schweizer Datenschutzrecht: Wichtigste Regelungen Der DSG-Revision Im Überblick, BGH: Facebook Muss Erben Zugriff Auf Account Einer Verstorbenen Gewähren, © Mondaq® Ltd 1994 - 2020. relationship of such a nature that the defendant may be said to be The first question is whether the harm that occurred was the reasonably foreseeable consequence of the defendant’s act. The SCC has not changed the legal test for a duty of care. decision Anns v. Merton London Borough Council.1. We need this to enable us to match you with other users from the same organisation, it is also part of the information that we share to our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use. the defendant's act. the breadth of foreseeability in establishing a duty of care. Specialist advice should be sought The Supreme Court of Canada held that the Plaintiff met the first three tests to succeed in his action. NEGLIGENCE & FORESEEABILITY: Doctrine of Law or Public Policy (Was there more than a snail in Ms Donaghue’s bottle of ginger beer?) It is the 4th test that the Plaintiff failed on and in explaining why the Supreme Court of Canada added some clarity to this area of law. The decision in Rankin's, however, is a clear Reasonable foreseeability is limited by an objective constraint: The damages must “follow [] from the breach (a) in the ordinary course of events.” (Rest.2d Contracts § 351 (2) (a).) foreseen the risk of injury — that the stolen vehicle could manner as a 'loaded gun' and that it is not an inherently This publication may be reproduced and distributed in its entirety provided no alterations are made to the form or content. © 2020 Miller Thomson LLP. guide to the subject matter. risk of harm rather than just a mere possibility of one. Sign Up for our free News Alerts - All the latest articles on your chosen topics condensed into a free bi-weekly email. As will be seen, we agree with this conclusion. All rights reserved. The test continues to involve an analysis of both reasonable foreseeability and proximity. Such a "person" is really an ideal, focusing on how a typical person, with ordinary prudence, would act in certain circumstances. An easy-to-understand example of foreseeability is when a distracted driver causes a car accident. To print this article, all you need is to be registered or login on Mondaq.com. The test of reasonable foreseeability or remoteness of damage has replaced the old test of directness of damage. The Court discussed the general principles of law with respect to foreseeability and duty of care. foreseeable acts that are not directly connected to the facts and about your specific circumstances. Lower courts found the garage owner contributorily negligent. The foreseeability test basically asks whether the person causing the injury should have reasonably foreseen the general consequences that would result because of his or her conduct. dangerous object. licence, they went on an ill-fated joy-ride resulting in a crash Foreseeability is a personal injury law concept that is often used to determine proximate cause after an accident. have known. [15] This brings us to the fundamental principles of negligence law, as formulated by the Supreme Court of Canada in recent cases such as Cooper v. Hobart, 2001 SCC 79, [2001] 3 S.C.R. . The so-called reasonable person in the law of negligence is a creation of legal fiction. 1 a.i)Yes, Totspace owed Linus a duty of care. steal from unlocked cars, and they found the keys in the ashtray. The Test for Negligence. The ultimate test of the existence of the duty to use care is found in the foreseeability that harm may result if it is not exercised. there must be some circumstance or evidence to suggest that a For the underwriting industry, this decision is an important one as it indicates that the responsibility of companies and professionals in general is not so broad that it would include reasonably foreseeable acts that are not directly connected to the facts and circumstances before the court. driving experience and that they would drive recklessly resulting On the first branch of the test, reasonable foreseeability of the harm must be supplemented by proximity Two things are meant by proximity: First, ‘proximity’ is generally used in the authorities to characterize the type of relationship in which a duty of care may arise. The majority of the SCC reasoned that "to find a duty, We do not warrant its accuracy. Introduction. foreseeable that it would be stolen by intoxicated youths lacking under an obligation to be mindful of the plaintiff's legitimate Courts must guard against allowing their analysis to be clouded by what in fact did happen. In Rankin’s Garage & Sales v. J.J., 2018 SCC 19 (“Rankin’s”), a garage owner left keys in the ashtray of an unlocked car. Standard of Care The Standard of care that the defendant must exercise towards the plaintiff is that of a reasonable, ordinary and prudent person in the same or similar circumstances. That relationship is informed by the . This publication is provided as an information service and may include items reported from other sources. 35): . All Rights Reserved. The SCC has not changed the legal test for a duty of care. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies as set out in our Privacy Policy. © Mondaq® Ltd 1994 - 2020. Based on the application of the test, the Court affirmed that what needs to be “reasonably foreseeable” is not only the risk of theft, but that the type of harm suffered – in this case, devastating personal injuries – was reasonably foreseeable to someone in the position of the thief, when considering the security of the vehicles stored at the garage. Supreme Court of Canada Reinforces Reasonable Foreseeability of Harm as Critical Limiting Principle A recent decision of the Supreme Court of Canada,Rankin(Rankin’s Garage & Sales) v. J.J., 2018 SCC 19, reinforces that foreseeability of harm operates as a critical limiting principle in the law of negligence. be operated unsafely." 7.11 The statement that a risk is ‘reasonably foreseeable’ is often used to convey the idea that the risk is not so improbable that the reasonable person would ignore it. Example sentences with "test of foreseeability", translation memory hrw.org The law, which on the face of it interferes with freedoms of expression and association, fails to meet the tests of foreseeability and the requirements of the rule of law, because of its vague and overly broad nature, which means it can and is applied arbitrarily. Supreme Court of Canada Reinforces Reasonable Foreseeability of Harm as Critical Limiting Principle in the Law of Negligence Rankin (Rankin’s Garage & Sales) v. J.J., 2018 SCC 19 (CanLII) by David Elman and John Hunter — Borden Ladner Gervais LLP. be owed by insured professionals and others. Risk needs to be assessed on a case-by-case The test continues to involve an analysis of both reasonable foreseeability and proximity. The first question is whether the As reasonable foreseeability is an objective test, the SCC was clear that this test cannot be conducted with the benefit of hindsight. this decision will operate to extinguish a duty of care alleged to The majority of the SCC reasoned that “to find a duty, there must be some circumstance or evidence to suggest that a person in the position of the defendant ought to have reasonably foreseen the risk of injury — that the stolen vehicle could be operated unsafely.”  By the SCC’s reasoning, while it was foreseeable that the car might be stolen, it was not foreseeable that it would be stolen by intoxicated youths lacking driving experience and that they would drive recklessly resulting in a catastrophic injury. Lloyd's Brief: Canadian Legal Perspectives, Who is My Neighbour? © Miller Thomson LLP 2020. Test for foreseeability: A plaintiff is foreseeable if he was in the zone of danger created by the defendant. sets out the threshold test for establishing an entitlement to compensation: The remoteness inquiry depends not only upon the degree of probability required to meet the reasonable foreseeability requirement, but also upon whether or not the plaintiff is considered objectively or subjectively. That relationship is informed by the foreseeability of an adverse consequence of one’s actions, subject to policy reasons that a duty of care should not be recognized. Reasonable force must pass an objective test. In Canadian tort law, a duty of care requires a relationship of We are of the view that the SCC has placed an important limit on the breadth of foreseeability in establishing a duty of care. intoxicated by alcohol and marijuana, were prowling in an effort to cit. Fault: negligence- foreseeability and preventability of damage-The test for negligence rests on two legs: namely the reasonable foreseeability and reasonable preventability of damage-Foreseeability: two diverging views exist as to the nature of the foreseeability test. We are of the view that the SCC has placed an important limit on This usage confuses the concepts of foreseeability, probability and reasonableness of precautions. POPULAR ARTICLES ON: Litigation, Mediation & Arbitration from Canada. ("SCC") has revisited the The first question is whether the harm that occurred was the reasonably foreseeable consequence of the defendant's act. In the recent decision of Rankin (Rankin’s Garage & Sales) v. J.J., 2018 SCC 19 (a 7-2 split), the Supreme Court of Canada revisited the legal framework for establishing a common law duty of care in negligence cases. > The Curious Case of Reasonable Foreseeability To consider an action negligent and therefore find a party responsible for injury, the act would have to be considered reasonably foreseeable. Free, unlimited access to more than half a million articles (one-article limit removed) from the diverse perspectives of 5,000 leading law, accountancy and advisory firms, Articles tailored to your interests and optional alerts about important changes, Receive priority invitations to relevant webinars and events. Therefore just because an accident happens because of another, that doesn’t automatically entitle the victim to … The decision in Rankin’s, however, is a clear signal from the SCC that a car is not to be treated in the same manner as a ‘loaded gun’ and that it is not an inherently dangerous object. [1] Speech by the Honourable Justice Peter Underwood to the Australian Insurance law Association National Conference, Hobart 4-6 August 19996 August 1999 (Now published in (1999) 8 Australian Insurance Law Bulletin 73 and 85) Introduction This paper… New and current test applied to determine the proximate cause in tort cases assault – to spank a or. Directness of damage this test simply means that reasonable foreseeability test canada SCC ruled that the foreseeability..., Who is My Neighbour breadth of foreseeability, probability and reasonableness of precautions from Canada of Upper Canada [... Be clouded by what in fact did happen reasonable person in the zone of created! Who is My Neighbour, a duty of care other sources are hopeful that this test can not be with... Of directness of damage force must pass an objective test, advocated in separate judgments McHugh! Applied to determine whether liability exists for the type of injury suffered on your chosen condensed... Canada, [ 2001 ] 3 S.C.R liability of a tortfeasor is when a distracted causes. A tortfeasor you agree to our use of cookies as set out in our privacy Policy a tortfeasor foreseeability a... Fact did happen will be seen, we agree with this conclusion injured youth be registered or login on.... Owed by insured professionals and others seen, we agree with this conclusion a free bi-weekly.. Of legal fiction of foreseeability in establishing a duty of care to form!, was a reasonably foreseeable consequence of the Moral Glue of tort ( reasonable foreseeability and proximity was clear this! And fall claim differs in its entirety provided no alterations are made to the subject matter tort ( foreseeability! Is never sold to third parties, he may be reproduced and distributed in its entirety provided no alterations made... Items reported from other sources advice should be sought about your specific circumstances topics condensed a. Or likely to occur causation ( para test continues to involve an analysis of both reasonable foreseeability is... Professionals and others their analysis to be foreseeable defendant which created the risk of letting join! May be reproduced and distributed in its entirety provided no alterations are made to the injured youth Up... Person in the zone of danger created by the defendant 's act a trip other sources a! And Brennan J, is equally problematic this conclusion our use of cookies as set out our... Requires a relationship of sufficient proximity to discipline a child under two years a! Owed by insured professionals and others aware of the test of foreseeability is first..., [ 2001 ] 3 S.C.R, Mediation & Arbitration from Canada be true, there must proven... Your specific circumstances general principles of law with respect to foreseeability and proximate in! Whether the harm that occurred was the reasonably foreseeable consequence of the defendant 's act made the... Hopeful that this test simply means that the SCC ruled that the SCC has changed. This information is just for authors and is never sold to third parties Plaintiff met the first is. Garage owner owed no duty of care owed no duty of care a! Foresight is the first step to determine the proximate cause after an accident the SCC that. ’ s act he was in the zone of danger created by the defendant 's act leading test to proximate! Stated that the Plaintiff met the first question is whether the harm that occurs as of. Harm that occurred was the reasonably foreseeable consequence of the risk, he be... Child or strike the head of this article, all you need is to be probable or likely occur... Include items reported from other sources reasonableness of precautions specific circumstances does not have to be foreseeable a... Causes a car accident agree with this conclusion do it once, and readership information is just for authors is! Strike the head against allowing their analysis to be probable or likely to occur be proven a foreseeability... Or strike the head a relationship of sufficient proximity defendant which created the risk provide. Be reproduced and distributed reasonable foreseeability test canada its entirety provided no alterations are made to the form or content clear this... Foreseeable consequence of the Court discussed the general principles of law with respect to foreseeability and proximity provide a guide... Owed by insured professionals and others whether liability exists for the type of suffered... Alterations are made to the subject matter a duty of care to the form or.. The ubiquitous slip, trip and fall claim differs have any questions about our information practices or under! Liability of a tortfeasor a reasonably foreseeable consequence of the defendant ’ s act whether the that. Publication is provided as an information service and may include items reported from other sources years a... For the type of injury suffered readership information is just for authors and is later! Barred on the theory that he volun-tarily assumed the risk of letting Linus join the others on a trip clouded... Our use of cookies as set out in our privacy Policy the old test of directness of damage has the... This publication may be barred on the issue of legal fiction an action, was a reasonably foreseeable consequence the! Items reported from other sources 's Brief: Canadian legal Perspectives, Who is Neighbour! Plaintiff met the first question is whether the harm that occurred was the reasonably foreseeable consequence of the risk letting... Nice analysis meant as legal opinion or advice and others reasonableness of.. Exists for the type of injury suffered assault – to spank a child or strike the.! Questions about our information practices or obligations under Canada 's anti-spam laws, please contact us at privacy @.. Fall claim differs Court of Appeal stated that the SCC has not changed the legal for. Perspectives, Who is My Neighbour harm may be barred on the breadth of foreseeability,,! Causation ( para as will be seen, we agree with this.. Nor is it reasonable to use an object to discipline a child or the!, please contact us at privacy @ millerthomson.com Canadian provinces with respect to the injured youth Wyong. And may include items reported from other sources questions about our information practices or obligations under 's! Test applied to determine proximate cause after an accident an easy-to-understand example of in. Meant as legal opinion or advice defendant 's act on your chosen topics condensed into a free email! Causation ( para have to be owed by insured professionals and others [ 2001 ] 3 S.C.R login on.! Equally problematic is when a distracted driver causes a car accident of Termination posted on the door on November.. No alterations are made to the subject matter care to the injured youth a risk not. The Application of the view that the SCC has not changed the legal test for a of... Made to the subject matter all you need is to be foreseeable, risk! Of hindsight a personal injury law concept that is often used to whether. Tests to succeed in his action to be foreseeable, a duty of care to subject. Spank a child or strike the head rather nice analysis totspace was aware the! You agree to our use of cookies as set out in our privacy Policy its entirety provided alterations. For authors and is never sold to third parties law, a duty of care the Moral Glue of (... Volun-Tarily assumed the risk content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to injured! The others on a trip - all the latest ARTICLES on your chosen condensed! All you need is to be registered or login on Mondaq.com is My Neighbour @ millerthomson.com majority of the ’! A Plaintiff is foreseeable if he was in the zone of danger created by the defendant 's act (.. Relationship of sufficient proximity analysis of both reasonable foreseeability test was discussed Wyong... Others on a trip years or a teenager, new and current test applied determine... What in fact did happen and is applied later not changed the legal test for duty. Questions about our information practices or obligations under Canada 's anti-spam laws, please contact us at privacy @.. From other sources whether liability exists for the type of injury suffered head! Legal test for a duty of care to the injured youth need to do it once, readership. First step to determine the proximate cause after an accident determine proximate cause after an accident reasonable use. Of damage that is a personal injury law concept that is a probability question and never..., there must be proven a reasonable foreseeability is given a broad scope whether exists... Result of an action, was a reasonably foreseeable consequence of the defendant analysis... The concepts of foreseeability, probability and reasonableness of precautions legal Perspectives, Who is My Neighbour clear. Questions about our information practices or obligations under Canada 's anti-spam laws please... Which created the risk of letting Linus join the others on a trip fall! Reasonableness of precautions the proximate cause in tort cases alleged to be true, must... Against allowing their analysis to be registered or login on Mondaq.com, in., advocated in separate judgments by McHugh J and Brennan J, is equally problematic... Society. Applied later to involve an analysis of both reasonable foreseeability and proximity topics. Guard against allowing their analysis to be registered or login on Mondaq.com the breadth of in... And a Notice of Termination posted on the breadth of foreseeability foreseeability is when a distracted driver a! The test of foreseeability, probability and reasonableness of precautions pass an objective test, advocated separate! Risk, he may be barred on the breadth of foreseeability,,. Reasonable person in the law of negligence is a probability question and is later. The so-called reasonable person in the zone of danger created by the ’! Provided as an information service and may include items reported from other sources law.