Negligence has four elements — duty, breach, causation and damage — and the duty of care is where every problem starts. Its modern root is Lord Atkin's "neighbour principle" in Donoghue v Stevenson [1932] AC 562 Persuasive (approved in IE): you must take reasonable care to avoid acts you can reasonably foresee would injure your "neighbour" — someone so closely and directly affected that you ought to have them in contemplation.
The current Irish test: Glencar
Ireland once followed the two-stage approach in Anns v Merton LBC, adopted by the Supreme Court in Ward v McMaster [1988] IR 337 Binding (IE). But in Glencar Keane CJ added a positive hurdle. Foreseeability and proximity are no longer enough; the plaintiff must show it is just and reasonable to impose the duty. So the Irish test runs in four stages:
- Reasonable foreseeability — was injury to this plaintiff (or class) reasonably foreseeable?
- Proximity — was there a sufficiently close and direct relationship?
- Just and reasonable — is it fair, just and reasonable to impose a duty?
- Countervailing policy — is there a policy reason (floodgates, indeterminate liability, chilling of public functions) against it?
This is stricter than the English Caparo Industries v Dickman [1990] 2 AC 605 Persuasive formulation it grew from: as O'Donnell J explained in Whelan v AIB [2014] IESC 3, the old Anns approach "loads the balance heavily in favour of finding liability," whereas Glencar makes the plaintiff make the positive case.
Established categories vs novel duties
You do not run the full four-stage test every time. In an established duty category — road users to one another, doctor to patient, employer to employee, manufacturer to consumer — you simply assert the recognised duty and move on to breach. Deploy the full Glencar analysis only where the duty is novel or borderline: a new relationship, a public-body defendant, or a pure-omission or pure-economic-loss flavour. That is where the marks and the policy discussion live, so argue both sides of "proximity" and "just and reasonable".
The full, exam-ready version
The tort of negligence: duty (Glencar), the standard of care and its four factors, res ipsa loquitur and public-body liability — with the full case table, worked examples and a model-answer skeleton. Checked against the primary sources.
or browse all modules →Frequently asked questions
What is the test for a duty of care in Ireland?
The four-stage test from Glencar Exploration v Mayo County Council (No 2) [2002]: reasonable foreseeability, proximity, whether it is just and reasonable to impose a duty, and whether any policy reason counts against it.
Is Donoghue v Stevenson still good law in Ireland?
Yes — its "neighbour principle" remains the foundation and was approved in Ireland in Kirby v Burke. But the modern test for a novel duty is Glencar, which adds the "just and reasonable" requirement.
Do I always have to apply the Glencar test?
No. In an established duty category (e.g. road users, doctor/patient, employer/employee) you assert the recognised duty. The full four-stage test is for novel or borderline duties.