PROXIMITY AND THE STANDARD OF CARE — COOK v. COOK
AbstractIn December 1986, the High Court decision in Cook v. Cook heralded a new development in the concept of proximity and its relevance in negligence actions in Australia. Not only did four of the five sitting judges hand down a joint judgment, thus formulating clearly the High Court interpretation and application of the general rule of proximity, begun by Deane J. in Jaensch v. Coffey, but the general rule has, it is submitted, been extended in its application. It is to the joint judgment that the attention of this note is directed, though it is noted that Brennan J. has, in three recent decisions involving various categories of negligence actions, given a separate judgment in which he confirms the view that '... I regard Lord Atkin's test of neighbourhood or proximity as satisfied by reasonable foreseeability of injury'.
Authors who publish with this journal retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License (CC-BY) that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.Articles in this journal are published under the Creative Commons Attribution Licence (CC-BY). This is to achieve more legal certainty about what readers can do with published articles, and thus a wider dissemination and archiving, which in turn makes publishing with this journal more valuable for authors.