判决理由
There is generally no duty of care to prevent a third party from causing damage to another. However, a duty may arise where the defendant has created or is responsible for a source of danger, or has knowledge of a specific risk.
事实
Littlewoods bought a cinema and left it empty while planning redevelopment. Vandals broke in and started a fire that spread to neighbouring properties. The owners of those properties sued Littlewoods.
判决摘要
The House of Lords held that Littlewoods was not liable. There is no general duty to prevent third parties from causing harm. Littlewoods did not know of the fire risk. Previous break-ins had not involved fire, so the fire damage was not reasonably foreseeable.
关键引述
"The common law does not impose a duty to prevent a third party from doing damage to another."
— Lord Goff
后续处理
Leading authority on the limited duty to prevent third-party harm in negligence.