Foreseeability in novel duty analysis

Topic preview

1. 01

   Foundation

   In a novel duty case, what kind of harm must be reasonably foreseeable before duty can even be argued?

2. 02

   Mechanics

   Why does reasonable foreseeability alone not prove that a duty of care exists?

3. 03

   Foreseeable Physical Or Property Damage

   A novel duty problem says the claimant was physically injured, or their property was damaged, in a way that was reasonably foreseeable before the event. How does that support foreseeability, and why does foreseeability still not prove duty by itself?

4. 04

   Risk allocation

   Why is it wrong to treat foreseeability as the whole duty test?

5. 05

   Distinction

   How do you keep foreseeability separate from proximity when deciding whether a duty of care is arguable?

6. 06

   Consequence

   If harm was foreseeable but no duty is established, what does that mean for the claimant's case at the next stage?

7. 1 more building block

   The full topic unlocks with FLK1 Playbook, including the remaining prompts and answer-key marking.