判决理由
The standard of care may be higher where the defendant knows or ought to know that the claimant is particularly vulnerable to injury. The risk of harm and the severity of potential consequences are relevant to what constitutes reasonable care.
事实
Mr Paris, who had only one eye, was employed as a mechanic. A chip of metal flew into his good eye, blinding him completely. His employer had not provided goggles.
判决摘要
The House of Lords held the employer was negligent. Although goggles were not routinely provided to mechanics, the employer knew of Mr Paris's disability and the catastrophic consequences of an eye injury made the precaution of providing goggles reasonable.
关键引述
"The more serious the damage which will happen if an accident occurs, the more should be done to prevent it."
— Lord Normand
后续处理
Classic authority on the relevance of the severity of potential harm to the standard of care.