This case is concerned with breach of duty in negligence part of tort law
Check our first class law notes here
Facts of Bolton v Stone
The claimant, Miss stone got injured when a cricket ball hit her. The ball was hit by the batsman who was playing in the field at a local cricket club.
The ball travelled 100 yards before hitting the claimant , clearing a fence of 78 yards from the pitch, and when the ball left the ground it was 17 feet high.
The evidence in this case suggested that the balls had not been hit out of the ground more than six times over a course of thirty years. The claimant sued the cricket club in the tort of negligence for her injuries.
The issue in this case was that was the cricket club negligent in not taking steps to avoid the danger of a ball being hit out of their ground.
Firstly the Oliver J said that the Defendants were not negligent. Then the Court of Appeal (COA) reversed this decision by saying that the Defendants were negligent, then the defendants appealed to House of Lords (HOL).
And the House of lords(HOL) held that the defendants were not negligent as the likelihhod of harm was very less and the cricket club had taken every precaution to avoid the ball going out of the stadium.
However this a rare scenario, which happened once in thirty years . As no one was injured before when the ball went out of the stadium.
Bolton v Stone Standard of care
It was said the standard of care taken by the cricket club was enough, as it was very rare that the ball went out of the stadium
Bolton v Stone Breach of Duty
In this case the defendant was not in the breach of duty as he had taken all of the precautionary measures as he was supposed to