Unit 2: Negligence: Causation and Defences

0.0(0)
studied byStudied by 0 people
0.0(0)
full-widthCall Kai
learnLearn
examPractice Test
spaced repetitionSpaced Repetition
heart puzzleMatch
flashcardsFlashcards
GameKnowt Play
Card Sorting

1/14

flashcard set

Earn XP

Description and Tags

These flashcards cover key principles and case laws related to negligence, causation, and defenses that are crucial for understanding legal liability in tort law.

Study Analytics
Name
Mastery
Learn
Test
Matching
Spaced

No study sessions yet.

15 Terms

1
New cards

What must the claimant prove regarding causation in a negligence claim?

That the defendant's breach caused the damage.

2
New cards

What test is used for establishing factual causation?

The 'but for' test.

3
New cards

What does the 'chain of causation' refer to?

The unbroken causal link between the defendant's breach and the damage caused.

4
New cards

What is the consequence if the damage would have happened without the defendant’s breach?

There will be no liability on the defendant.

5
New cards

Is it true that a defendant can claim an intervening event as the cause of the damage?

Yes, a defendant can claim that an intervening event broke the chain of causation.

6
New cards

In the case Rouse v Squires, why was the defendant not liable?

The police inspector's act was an unforeseeable intervening act.

7
New cards

What is the test for remoteness of damage in negligence?

The claimant’s damage must be reasonably foreseeable.

8
New cards

Is it necessary for the precise manner in which damage occurred to be foreseeable?

No, only the type of damage must be foreseeable.

9
New cards

What is the 'egg-shell skull' rule?

The defendant is liable for the full extent of injury, even if the claimant had unexpected frailties.

10
New cards

Which statements about contributory negligence are true?

B and C are true; the claimant's own lack of care may reduce damages.

11
New cards

In Froom v Butcher, why was there no reduction in damages?

The failure to wear a helmet did not cause or worsen the leg injury.

12
New cards

What is the legal principle regarding voluntary assumption of risk?

Volenti non fit injuria; it refers to circumstances where a person consents to the risks involved.

13
New cards

What is an example of an unforeseeable intervening act?

A negligent act by a third party that breaks the chain of causation.

14
New cards

In the context of causation, what should you establish if there are multiple causes?

Consider the possibility of a modified test for causation.

15
New cards

What must a defendant prove if they claim contributory negligence?

That the claimant's own negligence contributed to their harm.