FPL W45

Question 1

Explain causation.

In the context of a negligence claim.

Answer 1

There needs to be a causal connection between the event that establishes liablity and the damage that (allegedly) results therefrom. The defendant’s act or failure to act must be the material cause of the damage.

Question 2

What are the phases of causation?

Answer 2

• Phase 1 - Causation in fact: But for the existence of X, would Y have occurred?
• Phase 2 - Causation in law: Is the damage so **unforeseeable or remote **that it would not be reasonable to hold the other party responsible?

Question 3

What are the two relevant factors for causation in law?

Answer 3

1. The nature of the liability
2. The type of damage

And also check whether the defendant’s actions **materially contributed*

Question 4

For considering the nature of a liability,

What is the difference between breach of contract and tort?

Answer 4

Breach of contract involves disputes over the violation of contractual agreements, while tort deals with civil wrongs that result in harm.

Question 5

For considering the nature of a liability,

What is the primary focus for a breach of contract claim?

Answer 5

In a breach of contract claim, the primary issue is whether one party failed to fulfil their obligations as outlined in a contractual agreement.

Question 6

For considering the nature of a liability,

What must the plaintiff demonstrate to prove a breach of contract?

Answer 6

To prove a breach of contract, the plaintiff must demonstrate the existence of a valid contract, the defendant’s failure to perform as required by the contract, and the resulting damages.

Question 7

For considering the nature of a liability,

What is the focus for a breach of contract claim?

Answer 7

In a breach of contract claim, the focus is on the specific terms and conditions of the contract.

Question 8

For considering the nature of a liability,

What is the focus for a tort claim?

Answer 8

In a tort claim, the focus is on the defendant’s wrongful conduct (their actions) that resulted in harm (the impact) to the plaintiff.

Question 9

For considering the nature of a liability,

What must the plaintiff demonstrate to prove a tort?

Answer 9

To prove a tort, the plaintiff usually must establish that the defendant owed a duty of care, breached that duty, and caused harm to the plaintiff.

Question 10

What determines the standard of care for a breach of contract?

Answer 10

The standard of care is usually determined by the terms of the contract. The defendant is expected to fulfil their obligations as agreed upon in the contract.

Question 11

What determines the standard of care for a tort?

Answer 11

In tort cases, the standard of care is often determined by what a reasonable person would do under similar circumstances. The defendant is expected to exercise reasonable care to avoid causing harm to others.

Question 12

For considering the nature of a liability,

Explain consideration of intention.

Answer 12

In tort law, one must ascertain whether the defendant’s actions were intentional (the defendant intended to cause the harm) or unintentional (the defendant’s actions were negligent, leading to harm without intent).

Question 13

Explain the relevance of the type of damage

for causation in law.

Answer 13

The type of damage involved in a case is crucial. It could be physical injury, psychiatric injury (psychological harm or emotional distress), or damage to property.

Question 14

What are the practical steps for causation?

Answer 14

1. Determine X: The act or failure to act of the defendant;
2. Determine Y: The damage/loss;
3. Determine causation in fact (‘but for’);
4. Determine causation in law (remoteness); and
5. Conclusion (If there’s causation in fact and in law, there’s tortious liability!)

Question 15

What is the two-part categorisation of damages?

Answer 15

1. Material damage
2. Moral damage (non-pecuniary loss)

Question 16

In relation to pure economic loss,

How can damages be categorized?

Answer 16

1. Personal injury
2. Property damage, and
3. Pure economic loss

Question 17

In terms of damages,

What is personal injury and property damage, and what do they have in common?

Answer 17

Personal injury is a damage to a person’s body or health. Property damage involves harm to physical property.
These kinds of damages are commonly recoverable, including the consequential economic losses deriving from the primary injury or damage.

Question 18

In terms of damages,

What is pure economic loss?

Answer 18

Pure economic loss is damage that does not start with injury or physical harm and is not recoverable.

Question 19

What must you do to determine pure economic loss?

Answer 19

To determine whether damage is pure economic loss you need to take a two-step approach:
1. Check whether it’s economic loss (i.e. in itself not bodily injury or damage to property), and
2. Check whether this economic loss flowed from prior personal injury or property damage to the victim. If it did not, then it is pure economic loss.

Question 20

In what case were the damages for secondary victims established?

Answer 20

The damages for secondary victimes were established in the
Alock v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police case.

Question 21

What are the requirements for damages for secondary victims?

Answer 21

1. Medically recognized illness or condition as a result of a sudden and immediate attack upon the senses;
2. A close bond of love and affection;
3. Reaction of a reasonably brave person (given the level of trauma that was witnessed); and
4. Claimant was sufficiently proximate to the accident (in terms of time and space).

Question 22

For damages for secondary victims,

What is sufficient proximity to an acident?

Answer 22

1. Direct witness to the event,
2. Immediate aftermath, and
3. Close physical presence (physically present, even at some distance, close enough to be exposed to the traumatic event).

Question 23

For damages for secondary victims,

What is not sufficient proximity to an accident?

Answer 23

1. Indirect exposure (e.g. through media coverage or secondhand accounts),
2. Subsequent awareness (after significant time has passed and the immediate aftermath is over), and
3. Physical seperation (by a significant distance, barrier, or obstacle).