چکیده:
The thin skull rule, as judicial invention of 20th century, has come up from bodily damages cases. This rule applies in where negligent defendant due to pre-existing susceptibility and vulnerability victims, lead to unpredictable damages. The thin skull rule or eggshell plaintiff rule was first enunciated by Lord Justice Kennedy in Dulieu v. white and sons in 1901. Although place of birth thin skull rule is bodily damages cases but the courts tend to extend that rule to mental harms cases. This rule is known as an exception to the foreseeability of damage rule that is considerable in material damage cases. This rule is applicable in our law.
خلاصه ماشینی:
3. The Thin Skull Rule; A Judicial Invention of the Twentieth Century In common law, in cases where a damaging act leads to an unpredictable injury due to the fragility and vulnerability of the injured party, the thin skull rule1 or the eggshell plaintiff2 is cited to justify liability for all damages incurred.
Whereas the thin skull rule is applicable in cases where damage is caused by the fragility and vulnerability of the injured party (Graham & Gary, 1382: 413).
Therefore, the specific characteristic of claims subject to the thin skull rule is “the specific fragility and unusual vulnerability of the injured party” which leads to a severe and unforeseeable injury as a result of the defendant’s tortious act (Graham & Gary, 1982: 410).
The Thin Skull Rule and the Pre-existing Condition of the Injured Party In some cases, the injured party is a person with one eye, one leg, or one ear, and lost their counterpart in the past due to an accident or, by fate, was deprived of having a pair since birth, and unfortunately, due to the defendant’s fault, they lose their only eye and vision, their only leg and ability to walk, or their only ear and hearing, and experience a huge and severe injury compared to before, and this raises the question of how far the scope of compensable damages extends?
In this case, Judge Holt stated that where the defendant’s fault aggravates or activates a disease condition and latent injury of the injured party, the defendant is responsible for all damages (551:1969, Linden).
(
, 
, 
)
