Court: House of Lords
Judgment Date: 24 July 1996
Where Reported: [1996] A.C. 923; [1996] 3 W.L.R. 388; [1996] 3 All E.R. 801
Legal Issue in Stovin v Wise
The case of Stovin v Wise raised the legal issue of whether a public body, in this instance, a highway authority, owed a duty of care to road users in the exercise of its statutory powers.
The central question in Stovin v Wise revolved around the existence of a duty of care owed by the highway authority to individuals using the highway, particularly in situations where the authority’s actions or omissions could impact the safety of road users.
Material Facts in Stovin v Wise
The case involved Mr. Stovin, who was injured in a road traffic accident due to the dangerous layout of a junction.
The claimant argued that the highway authority, as the responsible public body, owed a duty of care to road users in maintaining the safety of the highway.
The claimant contended that the authority’s failure to address the known danger at the junction constituted a breach of this duty, leading to the accident and his subsequent injuries.
Stovin v Wise focused on the highway authority’s statutory powers and duties, the known danger at the junction, and the impact of the authority’s actions on road users’ safety.
Judgment in Stovin v Wise
The House of Lords held that the highway authority owed a duty of care to road users in the exercise of its statutory powers.
The judgment overturned the decision of the lower court and established the authority’s liability for the injuries sustained by Mr. Stovin.
The court’s decision was based on the recognition of a duty of care owed by the authority to road users, particularly in situations where the authority’s actions or omissions could impact the safety of individuals using the highway.
The Reason for the Decision in Stovin v Wise
The court’s decision was based on the recognition of a duty of care owed by the highway authority to road users in the exercise of its statutory powers.
The court emphasised that the authority’s awareness of a known danger at the junction, coupled with its failure to address the danger, constituted a breach of this duty.
The decision underscored the importance of the authority’s responsibility to maintain the safety of the highway and to take reasonable steps to address known dangers that could impact road users.
The court rejected arguments that sought to exclude the duty of care based on the authority’s discretionary powers or policy considerations.
The decision highlighted the legal principle that public bodies, including highway authorities, owe a duty of care to individuals affected by their actions or omissions, particularly in situations where the authority’s statutory powers could impact the safety of road users.
Legal Principles in Stovin v Wise
The case of Stovin v Wise established the legal principle that public bodies, such as highway authorities, owe a duty of care to individuals affected by their actions or omissions in the exercise of their statutory powers.
This duty encompasses the obligation to take reasonable steps to maintain the safety of the public, particularly in situations where the authority’s actions or inactions could impact the well-being of individuals using public infrastructure.
The decision emphasised the significance of the duty of care owed by public bodies to the public and highlighted the legal responsibility of authorities to prioritize the safety and well-being of individuals affected by their statutory powers and duties.
