Legal Causation Flashcards
What’s the difference between divisible and Indivisible injury?
Divisible - contribution to the injury can be apportioned according to contribution of various causes.
Indivisible - the contribution cannot be divided.
Which case illustrates the ‘but for’ test?
(Barnett v Chelsea Hospital).
What are the difficulties with factual causation?
1) Multiple causation; and 2) evidentiary gaps ie one bullet hits c but not sure which one.
What are multiple cumulative cases? Give an example.
Where more than one party contributed to the harm that caused the end result ie bad fumes in two different factories that the claimant worked for causing lung cancer.
Is contributing to a harm enough to cause liability? What is contributing to harm called? Which case illustrates this?
Yes it is enough to cause liability. It is called contributory negligence (Bonnington Castings Ltd v Wardlaw).
What are multiple cumulative cases? Give an example.
Where more than one party contributed to the harm that caused the end result ie bad fumes in two different factories that the claimant worked for causing lung cancer.
Is contributing to a harm enough to cause liability? What is contributing to harm called? Which case illustrates this?
Yes it is enough to cause liability. It is called contributory negligence (Bonnington Castings Ltd v Wardlaw).
To what degree is the defendant liable to the contribution of harm? Which case illustrates this?
The defendant is liable only to the extent of that contribution to harm (Holtby).
For indivisible injuries what is enough to be proved in order to establish liability? Which case illustrates this?
It is enough to prove material contribution to the harm (Bailey v Ministry of Defense).
When there’s multiple potential causes and science cannot tell us which was the cause, then it is enough for the claimant to show … . Which case illustrates this?
… that that there was a material increase of the risk (Fairchild).
What happens to a claim where some of the exposure was from the defendant himself? Which case illustrates this?
The claim does not fail; instead, (Fairchild) still applies but is proportionate to each person’s contribution (Barker v Corus).
Which act/section reversed the case of (Barker) in regards to a certain illness? What was that illness? Which case illustrates this codified provision?
(Compensation Act 2006, s3) reverses (Barker) on asbestosis related mesothelioma only (Heneghan v Manchester Dry Docks).
What does the exception to (Baker) imply for damages?
Full damages even when non-tortuous exposure happens.
This case illustrates that (Fairchild) only applies when there is an evidentiary gap. Give facts, ratio, and verdict briefly.
(Wilshire). Premature baby receives too much oxygen causing eye condition. One potential cause is too much oxygen alongside other non-tortuous ones. Held: no liability. Ratio: (Fairchild) only applies when there’s an evidentiary gap.
This case shows that the percentage of the event happening is relevant. What is the threshold percent? Give facts, ratio, and verdict briefly.
(Hoston v East Berkshire). The threshold percent is 50%. You can sue on 50% but not less.
