疏忽是英国侵权法的核心内容之一、作为一种独立的侵权种类,英国侵权法上的疏忽往往特指由于原、被告之间特殊的法律关系,使得被告对原告负有谨慎义务,而被告对原告的谨慎却未能达到法律所要求的程度致使原告遭受了损害。通过一系列的经典案例,英国司法界、理论界将疏忽的构成要素归纳为:(1)原被告之间是否存在着某种特殊关系而使得被告对原告负有谨慎义务;(2)如果被告对原告负有谨慎义务,被告是否违反了该谨慎义务;(3)如果被告违反了该谨慎义务,是否给原告造成了损害;(4)原告所遭受的损害与被告的疏忽之间是否具有因果关系;以及(5)原告的损害是否太遥远而不应得到法律的救济。本文将围绕构成要素这条主线,对英国侵权法下的疏忽展开讨论。在主文的第一部分,作者首先讨论了疏忽的核心内容——谨慎义务,作者通过Donlghue v Stevenson等经典案例考察了英国司法实践是如何判定当事人之间是否存在谨慎义务的;随后,作者进一步讨论了谨慎义务的另一方面—一谨慎程度;在此基础之上,作者最后讨论了与损害相关的两个基本问题:损害与疏忽的因果关系以及损害是否应该被救济。 Negligence is one of the core contents of the Tort Law. As an independent type of tort, negligence in the UK Tort Law often refers specifically to the plaintiff's due diligence due to the special legal relationship between the plaintiff and the defendant. The defendant The cautiousness of the plaintiff but failed to meet the requirements of the law resulted in the plaintiff suffered damage. Through a series of classic cases, the judiciary and theorists in Britain summarize the elements of negligence as: (1) whether there is any special relationship between the original defendants, so that the defendant has a cautious obligation to the plaintiff; (2) if the defendant (C) whether the defendant breached the duty of care; (c) if the defendant breached the duty of caution, caused any damage to the plaintiff; (4) whether the plaintiff suffered damage and the defendant's negligence had a causal link Relationship; and (5) whether the plaintiff's damage is too remote to be legally remedied. This article will focus on the main elements of the constituent elements of the British tort law to discuss the issue of negligence. In the first part of the main article, the author first discusses the core of negligence - a cautious obligation. The author examines how the British judicial practice determines whether there is a cautious obligation between the parties through classic cases such as Donlghue v Stevenson. After that, the author further discusses On the other hand, on the other hand, a cautious degree of cautiousness, on the basis of which the author finally discusses two basic issues related to damage: the causal link between damage and negligence and whether the damage should be remedied.