Legal Causation: Factual Tests, Intervening Acts, and Responsibility

All flashcards

Factual causation

Whether the defendant’s conduct contributed to the harm under the applicable factual test.

Legal causation

Whether the law should attribute the harm to the defendant after factual causation is established.

But-for test

Asks whether the harm would have occurred without the defendant’s conduct.

NESS test

Treats conduct as causal if it is necessary within a set of conditions jointly sufficient for the harm.

Novus actus interveniens

A new intervening act or event that may break the chain of causation.

Quiz questions

1. In the usual two-stage causation inquiry, which issue is considered first?Answer: Whether the defendant’s conduct was a factual cause of the harm.
2. What problem does the rule in Summers v. Tice address?Answer: Multiple negligent defendants may each avoid responsibility when the victim cannot identify which one caused the injury.
3. What are concurrent actual causes?Answer: Multiple acts combine to cause an injury that would not have occurred without their combination.
4. Under R v Cheshire, when can negligent medical treatment break the causal chain?Answer: When it is so independent and potent that the defendant’s contribution becomes insignificant.
5. What approach did the court use in Sindell v. Abbott Laboratories when the manufacturer of the harmful dose could not be identified?Answer: Allocating liability among manufacturers in proportion to their market shares.