Two Cheers for Caparo: Ravenscroft v Rederiaktiebolaget Transatlantic
son or his body after the incident, although she had been called to the hospital in which he died.2 In 1991, this was perceived as a difficult case. The judge, Ward J, had some doubts about the correctness (though possibly not the justice) of his decision in the plaintiffs favour, and that decision occupies fifteen pages of the Law Reports.3 Leave to appeal was granted. By the following year, the case was regarded as so easy that the Court of Appeal was able to reverse the decision without even calling upon counsel for the defendant. This decision occupies a single page, since 'it does not call for a fuller report.'4 The intervening factor was, of course, the decision of the House of Lords in Alcock v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police.5 In that case, their Lordships expressed doubts about the correctness of Ward J's judgment in Ravenscroft, and of the very similar result in Hevican v Ruane.6 It has been decided by the Court of Appeal that Ravenscroft (and presumably therefore Hevican) cannot survive the actual decision in Alcock.