Remoteness

Question 1

Function of remoteness doctrine

Answer 1

Excludes recovery for certain losses even if caused by the defendant (The Wagon Mound No. 1)

Question 2

What kind of damage has to be foreseeable

Answer 2

Thin skull users for physical vulnerability (Smith v Leech Brain & Co)
Thin skull users for financial vulnerability (Lagden v O’Connor)

Question 3

To what extent must the causal sequence of events be reasonably foreseeable?

Answer 3

Precise sequence of events not required (Hughes v Lord Advocate, Jolley v Sutton LBC, Corr v IBC Vehicles, Spencer v Wincanton Holdings, Banque Bruxelles Lambert SA v Eagle Star Insurance Co Ltd)