Q5

Question 1

1. Factual Causation

Answer 1

Barnett v Chelsea & Kensington Hospital Management Committee – ‘But for’ the hospital’s omission, the death would still have occurred, so causation failed.

Question 2

2. Legal Causation - intervening acts

Answer 2

Smith v Littlewoods – Courts assess whether intervening acts (e.g., third parties, nature) break the chain of causation. Here, vandals starting a fire was not foreseeable.

Question 3

3. Remoteness of Damage

Answer 3

Overseas Tankship (UK) Ltd v Morts Dock (The Wagon Mound No. 1) – Liability only attaches to foreseeable consequences, overruling the directness test in Re Polemis.

Question 4

4. Thin Skull Rule

Answer 4

Smith v Leechbrain – A defendant must take the claimant as they find them, including susceptibility to greater harm.

Question 5

5. Novus Actus Interveniens

Answer 5

Smith v Littlewoods – Unforeseeable third-party actions may break the causal chain and absolve the defendant of liability.