Loading [MathJax]/jax/output/HTML-CSS/fonts/TeX/fontdata.js

Causation + Remoteness

Description

Mind Map on Causation + Remoteness, created by j.wisbey.12 on 20/07/2014.
j.wisbey.12
Mind Map by j.wisbey.12, updated more than 1 year ago
j.wisbey.12
Created by j.wisbey.12 over 10 years ago
388
0
1 2 3 4 5 (0)

Resource summary

Causation + Remoteness
  1. Factual Causation
    1. The pursuer must prove factual causation
      1. The 'but for' test can be used, but problems with ommissions
        1. Barnett v Chelsea and Kensington Hospital Management Committee
      2. Material Contribution
        1. Need a balance of probabilities - Wardlaw v Bonnington Castings Ltd
          1. McGhee v NCB. No difference between increasing risk and materially contributing
          2. Addressing the atribution problem
            1. Fairchild v Glenhaven Funeral Services
              1. Parameters of Fairchild exception
                1. 1. Duty intended to protect employees
                  1. 2. Intended to create civil right
                    1. 3. Greater exposure to asbestos, greater risk of injury
                      1. 4. Cannot prove which dust is guilty
                        1. 5. Employee contracted disease which he should have been protected from
                        2. Legal Causation
                          1. Novus actus inteveniens
                            1. An external event, conduct of 3rd party, conduct of victim themselves
                            2. A new delict needs to occur.
                              1. Reasonable forseeability of victims actions - Sayers v Harlow Urban District Council
                              2. Remoteness of damage
                                1. Prevents wrongdoer from having to pay results of wrongdoing
                                  1. The grand rule
                                    1. 1. Damages directly and naturally arising
                                      1. 2.Reasonable foreseeability
                                        1. Which rule has priority?
                                          1. Result: not liable for things unforeseeable, must take victim as they find them, novus actus interveniens
                                      Show full summary Hide full summary

                                      0 comments

                                      There are no comments, be the first and leave one below:

                                      Similar

                                      Memory - AQA Psychology Unit 1 GCSE
                                      joshua6729
                                      IB Economics SL: Microeconomics
                                      Han Zhang
                                      B5 - Growth and Deveolopment
                                      blairzy123
                                      AQA GCSE Biology B1 unit 1
                                      Olivia Phillips
                                      GCSE AQA Chemistry - Unit 2
                                      James Jolliffe
                                      Key Biology Definitions/Terms
                                      courtneypitt4119
                                      AQA GCSE Physics Unit 3 Mindmap
                                      Gabi Germain
                                      An Inspector Calls- Quotes
                                      ae14bh12
                                      Blood MCQs Physiology PMU 2nd Year
                                      Med Student
                                      Specific Topic 7.2 Timber
                                      T Andrews