Eggshell skull: Difference between revisions

This rule holds that a [[tortfeasor]] is liable for all consequences resulting from their tortious (usually [[negligent]]) activities leading to an injury to another person, even if the victim suffers an unusually high level of damage (e.g. due to a pre-existing [[vulnerability]] or [[medical condition]]).<ref name="Watts v Rake">{{cite AustLII|HCA|50|1960|litigants=Watts v Rake |parallelcite=(1960) 108 [[CommonwelathCommonwealth Law Reports|CLR]] 158, [8] |courtname=auto}}.</ref> The eggshell skull rule takes into account the physical, social, and economic attributes of the plaintiff which might make them more susceptible to injury.<ref name="Nader">''Nader v Urban Transit Authority of NSW'' (1985) 2 [[NSW Law Reports|NSWLR]] 501, [[NSW Court of Appeal|Court of Appeal]] (NSW, Australia) per McHugh JA. [http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/LawCite?cit=1985+2+NSWLR+501 LawCite records] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220515001040/http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/LawCite?cit=1985+2+NSWLR+501 |date=2022-05-15 }}.</ref> It may also take into account the family and cultural environment.<ref name="Kavanagh v Akhtar">{{cite AustLII|NSWSC|779|1998|litigants=Kavanagh v Akhtar |parallelcite=(1998) 45 [[NSW Law Reports|NSWLR]] 588 |courtname=[[NSW Court of Appeal|Court of Appeal]] (NSW, Australia)}}.</ref> The term implies that if a person had a skull as delicate as that of the shell of an egg, and a tortfeasor who was unaware of the condition injured that person's head, causing the skull unexpectedly to break, the defendant would be held liable for all damages resulting from the wrongful contact, even if the tortfeasor did not intend to cause such a severe injury.