Man on the Clapham omnibus
Template:Short description Template:Use dmy dates
.jpg){kind=link}
The man on the Clapham omnibus is a hypothetical ordinary and reasonable person, used by the courts in English law where it is necessary to decide whether a party has acted as a reasonable person would – for example, in a civil action for negligence. The character is a fairly educated, intelligent but undistinguished person, against whom the defendant's conduct can be measured.
The term was introduced into English law during the Victorian era, and is still an important concept in British law. It is also used in other Commonwealth common law jurisdictions, sometimes with suitable modifications to the phrase as an aid to local comprehension. The route of the original "Clapham omnibus" is unknown, but London Buses route 88, which terminates at Omnibus Theatre, was briefly branded as "the Clapham Omnibus" in the 1990s and is sometimes associated with the term.[1][2][3]
History
The phrase was reportedly first put to legal use in a judgment by Sir Richard Henn Collins MR in the English Court of Appeal libel case McQuire v. Western Morning News (1903).[4] He attributed the phrase to Lord Bowen[5] and used it in a negative sense: Template:Quote
It may be derived from the phrase "Public opinion ... is the opinion of the bald-headed man at the back of the omnibus",[6] a description by the 19th-century journalist Walter Bagehot of a normal London man. Clapham, in South London, was at the time an undistinguished commuter suburb seen to represent "ordinary" London, and in the 19th century would have been served by horse-drawn omnibuses.
Lord Justice Greer used the phrase in Hall v. Brooklands Auto-Racing Club (1933)[7] to define the standard of care a defendant must live up to in order to avoid being found negligent.
The use of the phrase was reviewed by the UK Supreme Court in Healthcare at Home Limited v. The Common Services Agency (2014),[8] where Lord Reed said: Template:Quote
The expression has also been incorporated in Canadian patent jurisprudence, notably Beloit v. Valmet Oy[9] in its discussion of the test for obviousness.[10]
In Australia, the "Clapham omnibus" expression has inspired the New South Wales and Victorian equivalents, "the man on the Bondi tram" (a now disused tram route in Sydney),[11] "the man on the Bourke Street tram" (Melbourne),[12] and "the ordinary person on the Belconnen omnibus" (Canberra).[13]
In Hong Kong, the equivalent expression is "the man on the Shau Kei Wan tram".[14]
See also
- A moron in a hurry
- Bellwether
- Person having ordinary skill in the art
- Placeholder name
- Prudent man rule
- Objective historian
- Pub test
References
- ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "Citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- ↑ McQuire v Western Morning News [1903] 2 K.B. 100 at 109 per Collins MR.
- ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- ↑ Hall v Brooklands Auto-Racing Club [1933] 1 K.B. 205.
- ↑ Template:Cite BAILII
- ↑ Beloit v. Valmet Oy (1986), C.P.R. (3d) 289
- ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- ↑ Re Sortirios Pandos and Commonwealth of Australia [1991] AATA 18.
- ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".