Smith v Littlewoods Organisation Ltd

"Smith v. Littlewoods Organisation Ltd" [1987] 2 WLR 480 was a House of Lords decision on duty of care in the tort of Negligence. It was concerned in particular with potential liability for the wrondoing of third parties.

Facts

Littlewoods bought a former cinema building with the intention of demolishing it and building a supermarket on the site. One night, when the cinema was empty and none of Littlewoods’ employees were at the site a fire was deliberately started there by children and, having spread, damaged Smith’s buildings.

Judgment

The House of Lords held that since there was nothing inherently dangerous about an empty cinema, i.e. it was not a source of risk. The only thing that could possibly have prevented a fire would be a 24-hour guard on the premises and that would be an intolerable burden to impose on the owners in this case. Mere foreseeability of damage was not sufficient basis to find liability.

Conclusion

The law does not recognise a general duty of care to prevent others from suffering loss or damage caused by the deliberate wrongdoing of third parties. A closer relationship between claimant and the wrongdoer is required to establish such a duty. See e.g. "Home Office v. Dorset Yacht Co.", where borstal officers were held liable for damage caused to the plaintiffs by borstal boys who were under their control.