Causation Flashcards Preview

Tort Law > Causation > Flashcards

Flashcards in Causation Deck (19):


Man chose not to wear safety harness, fell and died. Held that even if the equipment had been available he wouldn't have worn it, no causation.


Wright v Cambridge Medical Group

GP was negligent in sending child to hospital, hospital was negligent in treating her, was left with a permanent disability. Held if she had been referred promptly she would have escaped serious disability, GP couldn't rely on defence of even if he had referred hospital would have been negligent.


Chester v Afshar

C had back surgery, wasn't warned of a small risk of causing a disability, risk materialised. Evidence suggested she'd have had the surgery even if she'd been told of the risk, however court held she probably would have delayed if she'd known the risk. But for test was passed.


Dingle v Associated Newspapers

Several newspapers published the same libel on the same day, one party was sued who then recovered costs from the others.


Rahman v Arearose

C was attacked while working and his eye was injured, negligent hospital treatment left him blind in one eye. He developed PTSD in relation to the blindness. There was proportionate liability on the parts of the employer and the hospital.


Baker v Willoughby

C was injured in a car accident and awarded damages. He had a lasting disability. He was later shot in the damaged leg and it had to be amputated. Held that the first defendant was liable for the amputation, if second defendant was caught he'd only be liable for the additional harm caused.


Jobling v Associated Dairies

Claimant was injured at work, but later a supervening illness caused complete incapacity to work. Held that the first defendant was not liable for this, on but for test incapacity would have happened anyway.


Gray v Thames Trains

Claimant had PTSD caused by train crash, later stabbed pedestrian to death. Held that there was no liability for loss of earnings while in prison on the facts of Jobling.


Allied Maples v Simmons and Simmons

Solicitor negligently advised on a takeover, there was sufficient action for loss of chance to negotiate a better outcome


Barnett v Chelsea Hospital

3 men died of poisoning at hospital after doctor failed to treat them, but even speedy attention wouldn't have saved them, they would have died anyway but for the doctor's negligence.


Hotson v East Berkshire AHA

Could not be established on the balance of probabilities that the negligence had made any difference so claim failed.


Gregg v Scott

Negligent treatment reduced chances of survival from 42% to 25%, claim failed as there was always less than a 50% chance of survival.


Bonnington Castings v Wardlow

Progressive disease case, each exposure made a material contribution, did not need to prove that the guilty exposure exceeded 50%.


McGhee v National Coal Board

Non progressive disease case, clear breach of duty but the breach contributed to the risk rather than the injury itself, causation still established.


Fairchild v Glenhaven

Non-progressive mesothelioma case, impossible to say which breach of duty caused the illness, McGhee was applied and so each defendant having contributed to the risk was enough for causation.


Re Pleural Plaques

Trivial injury, internal scarring and anxiety over risk of further disease. Held not to be compensable, "nought plus nought equals nought".


Sienkiewicz v Grief

Applied Compensation Act, claimant had been exposed to risk by employer and environment, was doubling the risk of environmental exposure required? Or was the 18% increase in risk acceptable? Held that Fairchild applied, had to show material increase in risk.


Barker v Corus

Mesothelioma case - multiple employers increased risk of disease. Some employers had become insolvent. Was held that the remaining employers should be proportionately liable for the increase in risk of harm that they caused. Reversed by Compensation Act 2006.


Heneghan v Manchester Dry Docks

Fairchild would apply to lung cancer cases as well as meso.