Causation - novus actus interveniens

Question 1

Human Intervention

Answer 1

Deliberate, voluntary, informed and unreasonable.

Question 2

Omissions

Answer 2

Do not usually break the chain of causation.

Question 3

Baker v Willoughby

Answer 3

Leg damaged in negligent car accident and then shot by robbers. Shooting was not novus actus because leg was already injured and earnings already lost.

Question 4

Jobling v Associated Dairies

Answer 4

Permanent disability caused by accident at work, lost 50% earning capacity. Unrelated disease three years later, lost total earning capacity and removed employers causal connection.

Question 5

Lamb v Camden London BC

Answer 5

Original defendant is still liable if the act was foreseeable.

Question 6

Knightley v Johns

Answer 6

D’s dangerous driving, needed to close tunnel, but police officer’s unreasonable instruction to ride a motorcycle against the flow of oncoming traffic was unreasonable and broke the chain.

Question 7

Corr v IBC Vehicles

Answer 7

For novus acts it must be entirely unreasonable in all the circumstances. So C’s suicide being a result of depression caused by injury due to D’s negligence, it was not unfair to hold D responsible for C’s suicide.

Question 8

McKew v Holland & Hannen & Cubitts (Scotland) Ltd

Answer 8

Leg was damaged by D’s negligence but it was unreasonable for C to climb the stairs completely unaided so this was novus actus.

Question 9

Carslogie Steamship Co Ltd v Royal Norwegian Government

Answer 9

Ship damaged in collision with D and further damaged by storm en route to repairs. D was a ‘but for’ cause but did not materially increase the risk of storm damage - this could have happened anyway and was not novus actus.

Question 10

Reeves v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis

Answer 10

Cannot rely on a break in the chain of causation if the duty of care was imposed to prevent that deliberate, voluntary, informed and unreasonable act.