Home Office v Dorset Yacht Co Ltd [1970] AC 1004 (HL)

Facts

  • A group of young offenders, supervised by Home Office officers, were undergoing training on an island.
  • The officers had explicit instructions to supervise the trainees but failed to maintain adequate control.
  • Seven trainees escaped due to the officers' lack of supervision and damaged a nearby yacht.
  • The yacht owners sued the Home Office, alleging their loss resulted from the officers' negligent failure to control the trainees.
  • The court was required to decide if the Home Office owed a duty of care to third parties whose property might be harmed by the actions of persons under their control, focusing on whether the custodial relationship imposed such a legal duty.

Issues

  1. Whether the Home Office owed a duty of care to third parties for harm caused by individuals under its control.
  2. Whether the foreseeability and proximity resulting from the custodial relationship established liability for harm caused by the trainees.
  3. To what extent existing precedent regarding duty of care, especially concerning third-party interventions, should be modified or interpreted.

Decision

  • The House of Lords held that a duty of care may arise where the defendant exercises control over another whose actions foreseeably cause harm.
  • A special relationship of control, as between borstal officers and the trainees, established sufficient proximity to found liability.
  • Foreseeability that the trainees would inflict damage was established; thus, the Home Office could be liable for the negligent supervision.
  • The court departed from a strict approach that limited liability for acts of third parties, expanding the circumstances in which such a duty is recognized.

Legal Principles

  • Duty of care in negligence may arise where there is a special relationship of control or responsibility, even where harm is caused by a third party.
  • The "neighbour principle" from Donoghue v Stevenson [1932] AC 562 underpins this approach, with the focus on reasonable foreseeability and relational proximity.
  • The decision marked a shift towards considering proximity and foreseeability for third-party actions, rather than restricting claims to direct acts.
  • Later cases refined remoteness (Lamb v Camden) and limited the extension of such duties, especially regarding public bodies (Hill v Chief Constable of West Yorkshire).
  • The legal approach has been further systematized by the three-stage test in Caparo Industries v Dickman, which incorporates foreseeability, proximity, and policy considerations.

Conclusion

Home Office v Dorset Yacht Co Ltd is a leading authority for establishing that duty of care in negligence may exist where a party exerts control over others, making it foreseeable that their negligence could cause third-party harm. The case broadened the scope for finding such duties but has been refined by subsequent authorities, which clarify the limits of liability and introduce policy considerations, especially for public bodies and in cases involving acts of third parties.

The answers, solutions, explanations, and written content provided on this page represent PastPaperHero's interpretation of academic material and potential responses to given questions. These are not guaranteed to be the only correct or definitive answers or explanations. Alternative valid responses, interpretations, or approaches may exist. If you believe any content is incorrect, outdated, or could be improved, please get in touch with us and we will review and make necessary amendments if we deem it appropriate. As per our terms and conditions, PastPaperHero shall not be held liable or responsible for any consequences arising. This includes, but is not limited to, incorrect answers in assignments, exams, or any form of testing administered by educational institutions or examination boards, as well as any misunderstandings or misapplications of concepts explained in our written content. Users are responsible for verifying that the methods, procedures, and explanations presented align with those taught in their respective educational settings and with current academic standards. While we strive to provide high-quality, accurate, and up-to-date content, PastPaperHero does not guarantee the completeness or accuracy of our written explanations, nor any specific outcomes in academic understanding or testing, whether formal or informal.
No resources available.

Job & Test Prep on a Budget

Compare PastPaperHero's subscription offering to the wider market

PastPaperHero
Monthly Plan
$10
Assessment Day
One-time Fee
$20-39
Job Test Prep
One-time Fee
$90-350

Note the above prices are approximate and based on prices listed on the respective websites as of May 2025. Prices may vary based on location, currency exchange rates, and other factors.

Get unlimited access to thousands of practice questions, flashcards, and detailed explanations. Save over 90% compared to one-time courses while maintaining the flexibility to learn at your own pace.

All-in-one Learning Platform

Everything you need to master your assessments and job tests in one place

  • Comprehensive Content

    Access thousands of fully explained questions and cases across multiple subjects

  • Visual Learning

    Understand complex concepts with intuitive diagrams and flowcharts

  • Focused Practice

    Prepare for assessments with targeted practice materials and expert guidance

  • Personalized Learning

    Track your progress and focus on areas where you need improvement

  • Affordable Access

    Get quality educational resources at a fraction of traditional costs

Tell Us What You Think

Help us improve our resources by sharing your experience

Pleased to share that I have successfully passed the SQE1 exam on 1st attempt. With SQE2 exempted, I’m now one step closer to getting enrolled as a Solicitor of England and Wales! Would like to thank my seniors, colleagues, mentors and friends for all the support during this grueling journey. This is one of the most difficult bar exams in the world to undertake, especially alongside a full time job! So happy to help out any aspirant who may be reading this message! I had prepared from the University of Law SQE Manuals and the AI powered MCQ bank from PastPaperHero.

Saptarshi Chatterjee

Saptarshi Chatterjee

Senior Associate at Trilegal