Q: Is negligence that people should exercise reasonable care when they act by taking account of the potential harm that they might foreseeably cause to other people? ¶
Q: Is negligence never closed""? ¶
A: Yes, and in Dorset Yacht v Home Office it was held that the government had no immunity from suit when they negligently failed to prevent the escape of juvenile offenders who subsequently vandalise a boatyard.
Q: Is negligence different in that the plaintiff must prove his loss? ¶
A: Yes, and a particular kind of loss, to recover.
Q: Is negligence 'too remote' or not a 'proximate cause' of another's harm if one would 'never' reasonably foresee it happening? ¶
Q: Was negligence too remote from the plaintiff's injury? ¶