BOLTON V. STONE
(1951) A.C. 850
NATURE OF THE CASE: This is an appeal from a determination of liability.
FACTS: During a cricket match a batsman hit a ball which struck and injured Stone (P) who
was standing on a highway adjoining the ground. The ball was hit out of the ground at a
point at which there was a protective fence rising to seventeen feet above the cricket
pitch. The distance from the striker to the fence was some seventy-eight yards and that to
the place where the respondent was hit about one hundred yards. The ground had been occupied
and used as a cricket ground for about ninety years, and there was evidence that on some six
occasions in a period of over thirty years a ball had been hit into the highway, but no one
had been injured. P claimed damages for negligence from the appellants, as occupiers of the
ground. P claimed that a fence was not high enough to keep the balls from flying out of the
field. D claimed that only 6-10 balls had flown out in the last 30 years so it was an
unforeseeable risk. The trial court ruled for D; P appealed. Appeals court reversed in favor
of P stating that it was a foreseeable risk This was the appeal to the House of Lords.
ISSUE:
RULE OF LAW:
HOLDING AND DECISION:
LEGAL ANALYSIS:
Get
free access to the entire content for Mac, PC or Online
for 2-3 days and free samples
of all kinds of products.
for 2-3 days and free samples of all kinds of products.
https://bsmsphd.com
© 2007-2016 Abn Study Partner
No comments:
Post a Comment