The case of Home Office v Dorset Yacht Co 1970 concerns the decision on whether a person or a body can be liable for a third partys action if that party was under the supervision or control of such person or body.

Dorset yacht co v home office. This case document summarizes the facts and decision in Home Office v Dorset Yacht Co. Home Home Office v Dorset Yacht Co 1970 AC 1004 1027D1030E only. Dorset Yacht Co Ltd v Home Office 1970 Facts.

Borstal officers were required to supervise young offenders who were working on Brown Sea Island however the officers left the boys unsupervised. The owner sued the home office for negligence. Tort Law provides a bridge between course textbooks and key case judgments.

Home Office v Dorset Yacht Co Ltd 1970 UKHL 2 1970 AC 1004 is a leading case in English tort law. For a cause not be too remote the act of a third party must be both reasonably foreseeable and very likely. The boat owners sued the Home Office alleging negligence by the prison officers.

Where harm is caused is caused through the acts of a 3rd party in this case it was the three home office officers a duty may also be imposed if there is a special relationship between the maker of the omission and that 3rd party. One night the Borstal officers retired for the evening leaving the boys unsupervised. Home Office v Dorset Yacht Co Ltd.

Prisoners escaped from a rehabilitation program on an island. One night the Borsta. Home Office v Dorset Yacht Co Ltd 1970 AC.

The document also included supporting commentary from author Craig Purshouse. Judgement for the case Home Office v Dorset Yacht Co. It did not matter if the act of the third party was tortious or not.