Revill v Newbery – 1996

January 11, 2024
Micheal James

Jurisdiction / Tag(s):

Introduction to Revill v Newbery – 1996

Revill v Newbery is a crucial legal case concerning negligence in tort law. This case revolves around an incident involving Mr. Revill and Mr. Newbery, which led to a legal dispute over negligence. It’s a significant case because it helps to understand how the law addresses situations where one person might be responsible for causing harm or damage to another unintentionally.


The case emerged from an event where Mr. Revill suffered an injury due to the negligence of Mr. Newbery. The incident occurred in circumstances that led to Mr. Revill’s injury, prompting him to take legal action. It involves the detailed narrative of what happened, where it happened, and the events leading up to the disagreement that ended up in court.

Legal Issue

The central question the court needed to resolve in Revill v Newbery was whether Mr. Newbery’s actions amounted to negligence as per the law. Both parties presented their arguments about whether Mr. Newbery failed in his duty of care towards Mr. Revill. This case scrutinized the duty of care owed by one person to another in a situation where harm resulted from alleged negligence.

Chronology of Events

This section outlines a chronological sequence of incidents that transpired before the legal dispute. It meticulously details the series of events leading up to the situation where Mr. Revill sustained harm due to the actions or negligence of Mr. Newbery. It paints a comprehensive picture of the events, providing context and background leading to the legal conflict.

Court Proceedings

The court proceedings of Revill v Newbery encapsulated a comprehensive legal examination of the evidence and arguments presented by both sides. Witnesses might have testified, evidence would have been presented, and legal arguments made to establish whether negligence occurred and if Mr. Newbery was liable for the harm suffered by Mr. Revill.

Judgment and Ruling

Following a thorough examination of evidence and arguments, the court arrived at a decision. The judge or jury pronounced their judgment, determining whether Mr. Newbery’s actions constituted negligence, and if so, the legal consequences that followed. The court provided a detailed explanation justifying their decision based on the law and evidence presented during the trial.

Impact and Precedent

The case of Revill v Newbery has a lasting impact on how negligence cases are approached in tort law. The court’s decision set a precedent, influencing similar cases and guiding future legal interpretations. This precedent served as a reference point for subsequent cases involving similar circumstances of alleged negligence.

Significance and Lessons

Revill v Newbery holds significance in highlighting the application of duty of care in negligence cases. It emphasizes the importance of understanding legal responsibilities towards others and the implications of breaching such responsibilities. The case serves as a lesson in recognizing and fulfilling duties owed to prevent harm to others.


In conclusion, Revill v Newbery elucidates the intricacies of negligence in tort law. It emphasizes the duty of care and its role in legal disputes involving harm caused by alleged negligence. This case stands as a significant reference point in understanding legal obligations and liability concerning negligence, shaping future legal interpretations and applications in similar cases.

Why Choose Us:

Our process of hiring Law Writing Experts involves rigorous evaluation and selection criteria. We seek professionals with specialized legal knowledge, academic expertise, and a proven track record in legal writing. Applicants undergo thorough assessments, including subject-specific tests, writing samples, and verification of credentials. We prioritize candidates with advanced degrees in law, ensuring their competence and understanding of legal principles. Moreover, we assess their ability to research, analyze complex legal issues, and articulate coherent arguments. Our recruitment process emphasizes expertise, experience, and a commitment to delivering high-quality, accurate, and well-researched legal content for our clients.

Cite This Work

Select a referencing style to export a reference for this article:

All Answers ltd, 'Revill v Newbery – 1996' (, September 2012 ) <> accessed 23 April 2024
My, Law, Tutor. (September 2012 ). Revill v Newbery – 1996. Retrieved from
"Revill v Newbery – 1996." 9 2012. All Answers Ltd. 04 2024 <>.
"Revill v Newbery – 1996." MyLawTutor., September 2012. Web. 23 April 2024. <>.
MyLawTutor. September 2012. Revill v Newbery – 1996. [online]. Available from: [Accessed 23 April 2024].
MyLawTutor. Revill v Newbery – 1996 [Internet]. September 2012. [Accessed 23 April 2024]; Available from:
<ref>{{cite web|last=Tutor |first=MyLaw |url= |title=Revill v Newbery – 1996 | |date=September 2012 |accessdate=23 April 2024 |location=UK, USA}}</ref>

Related Cases

Dick Bentley v Harold Smith

. Last modified: April 15, 2024

Introduction to Dick Bentley v Harold Smith The world of contracts can be a complex one, especially when it comes to the interpretation of statements made during negotiations. Dick Bentley Productions Ltd v Harold Smith (Motors) Ltd [1965] stands as a significant case in English contract law, offering valuable insights into the distinction between a […]

Performance Cars v Abraham

. Last modified: April 15, 2024

Introduction to Performance Cars v Abraham Performance Cars Ltd v Abraham (1962) stands as a landmark case in English tort law, specifically regarding the concept of causation in negligence claims. This case study delves into the factual background, the legal issue at stake, the court’s decision and reasoning, and the lasting impact of the case […]

R v Hennessy – 1989

. Last modified: April 15, 2024

Introduction to R v Hennessy – 1989 The criminal justice system grapples with complex issues when a defendant’s actions seem involuntary due to a medical condition. R v Hennessy (1989) stands as a significant case in English law, delving into the boundaries of the defense of automatism in the context of diabetic hypoglycemia. This case […]

go to top