Short answers, pulled from the story.
The four elements of a negligence claim are duty, breach, causation, and damages. A plaintiff must prove that the defendant owed them a duty of care, that the defendant breached that duty, that the breach caused the plaintiff's injury, and that the plaintiff suffered a recoverable loss. Some jurisdictions recognize three or five elements, but the underlying requirements remain broadly consistent.
Donoghue v Stevenson, decided in 1932, established the modern law of negligence for the Commonwealth, including the duty of care and the fault principle. The case arose after May Donoghue found a decomposed snail in a ginger beer bottle in a Paisley cafe and suffered nervous shock and gastro-enteritis. Lord Atkin's ruling defined a legal duty not to harm persons closely and directly affected by one's conduct, known as the neighbour principle.
The but-for test asks whether the plaintiff's injury would have occurred without the defendant's breach of duty. If the harm would not have happened but for the defendant's conduct, causation is established. Australia's High Court has recognized that the test cannot resolve every situation, particularly where multiple causes contribute to the same damage, and allows a commonsense test as an alternative in exceptional cases.
The eggshell skull rule holds that a defendant is liable for the full extent of harm caused to a plaintiff, even when the plaintiff's unusual vulnerability made the injury far greater than anyone could have foreseen. Australia reaffirmed the rule in Kavanagh v Akhtar, meaning defendants must take their victims as they find them regardless of pre-existing frailty.
Palsgraf v Long Island Rail Road produced a landmark split over how far a defendant's duty of care extends. Judge Cardozo, writing for the majority, held that the railway owed no duty to Palsgraf because she was not a foreseeable plaintiff, struck by falling scales after a distant fireworks explosion on the platform. Judge Andrews dissented, arguing that all persons owe one another a general duty not to act negligently regardless of foreseeability. Cardozo's view remains the majority rule in the United States.
Negligence damages include special damages for quantifiable losses such as medical bills, lost wages, and property repair costs; general damages for non-quantifiable harms such as pain and suffering; and nominal damages where loss is minimal or hard to measure. Punitive damages are available in most jurisdictions only when the defendant's conduct was wanton, willful, or reckless. Damages are awarded as a single lump sum, and courts place no restriction on how the plaintiff spends the award.