Tort - General Negligence - Causation Cases Flashcards Preview

Law - Tort > Tort - General Negligence - Causation Cases > Flashcards

Flashcards in Tort - General Negligence - Causation Cases Deck (17)
Loading flashcards...
1

Barnett v Chelsea and Kensington Hospital Management Committee

Factual Causation - "But For Test"

 

But for D's breach of duty, would the harm to C have occurred? If yes, the claim will fail. If no, factual causation will be established.

2

Hotson v East Berkshire Health Authority

Factual Causation - but for test - BoP

 

C fell out of tree and was treated negligently - 75% chance of condition happening without D's intervention. C must show on the balance of probabilities that the harm suffered was caused by D.

3

Bonnington Castings v Wardlaw Ltd

Factual Causation - Material contribution D negligently exposed C to dust - led to disease

 

Where harm suffered by C has several causes, C only has to demonstrate that D's breach materially contributed to the harm. Doesn't have to prove on BoP that D was sole cause.

4

Fairchild v Glenhaven Funeral Services

Factual Causation - Material increase in risk - Mesothelioma

 

In mesothelioma cases, the court will hold each employer in breach of duty liable for materially increasing the claimant's risk of harm. Because mesothelioma is an invisible injury, each D will be liable in full.

5

Sienkiewicz v Greif

Factual causation - material increase in risk approach limitation

 

Material increase in risk approach should be limited to cases of scientific uncertainty - mesothelioma being the only such case atm.

6

Holtby v Bringham and Cowan (Hull) Ltd

Factual Causation - Divisible injuries

 

If a court has evidence enabling it to divide injury suffered by C, it will apportion damages accordingly; asbestosis is a divisible injury.

7

Rahman v Aerose Ltd

Intervening acts by 3rd party

 

If a court has evidence enabling it to divide injury suffered by C, it will apportion damages accordingly; psychiatric injury is divisible. Medical negligence will rarely break the chain of causation unless grossly negligent - may break the chain.

8

Scott v Shephard

Acts of instinct will not break the chain of events.

9

Knightley v Johns

Blocked tunnel - police car driving against the traffic

 

The negligent intervention of a third pary will break the chain when it is unforeseeable.

10

Rouse v Squires

Multiple lorry crash

 

The negligent intervention of a third party will not break the chain when it is foreseeable.

11

Lamb v Camden London Borough Council

D negligently damaged C's house, while unoccupied, squatters damaged house

 

Reckless or intentional acts will break the chain if unforeseeable.

12

Stansbie v Troman

Decorator left house unlocked - thief stole diamond bracelet.

 

Reckless or intentional acts will not break the chain if foreseeable.

13

McKew v Holland

D's negligence had weakened C's leg - C descended stairs with no handrail and fell. D not liable as C unreasonable.

 

Acts by C will break chain of causation if entirely unreasonable.

14

Wieland v Cyril Lord Carpets Ltd

C injured neck due to D negligence, C fitted with collar which made it difficult to wear glasses, consequently fell down stairs.

 

Intervening acts by C will not break the chain where they are reasonable.

15

Cork v Kirby

Factual Causation

 

But for test

16

Smith v Littlewoods Organisation Ltd

Acts of a third party - must be unforeseeable and unreasonable to break the chain of causation

17

Spencer v Wincanton Holdings Ltd

Courts will take into account claimants trying to live their life post-injury when consideriong acts of the claimant with regards to causation.