Describe and illustrate the rules on causation and remoteness of damage in tort.

There are exceptions, such as in the case of strict liability, but tort liability is about establishing whether anyone is at fault or is to blame.

Grade: A-C | £3.99.

This essay explains the law of causation in tort.

This explanation also mentions causation in fact and causation in law.

The 'but for' test as applied by Lord Denning in Cork v Kirby Maclean Ltd (1952) is also covered.

The essay then goes on to discuss the problems of complex cases and where there are multiple causes.

The essay illustrates points by the use of a number of leading cases including:   McGhee v National Coal Board (1972); Wilsher v Essex Area Health Authority (1988); Cutler v Vauxhall Motors (1970); Fairchild v Glenhaven Funeral Services (2002); Jobling v Associated Dairies (1982); Carslogie Steamships Co v Royal Norwegian Navy (1952)  and others.

The matter of a causal link is also discussed as well as the chain of causation and any new or intervening act (novus actus interveniens).

The essay also contains a full description of the law of remoteness of damage which is illustrated by such cases as  Re Polemis and Furness, Withy & Co (1921); Wagon Mound (No 1) (1961); Bradford v Robinson Rentals (1967); Wagon Mound (No 2) (1967).

 There is sufficient scope for you to adapt or develop according to your individual needs.



(Word count 2048)






Related Items

The items below list this Essay as being related in some way.


There are no related tags.

Amazon's recommended Books

RSS Feeds