Use LEFT and RIGHT arrow keys to navigate between flashcards;
Use UP and DOWN arrow keys to flip the card;
H to show hint;
A reads text to speech;
8 Cards in this Set
- Front
- Back
|
to start of |
to establish if (d)’s breach caused the (c) injury both damage in fact and in law must be established. |
|
|
second part |
but for (d’s actions) (would the injury/damage have occurred?) Barnett V Chelsea + Kensington Hospitals) |
|
|
Consider novus actus interveniens |
smith v littlewoods |
|
|
third part |
to establish causation in law, it must be shown that the damage was foreseeable and not too remote from the breach (wagon mound) |
|
|
if YES to part three |
bradford v robinson rentals |
|
|
if NO to part three |
Doughty v Tuner Asbestos |
|
|
forth part |
it does not matter whether the full extent of the injury was foreseeable as you must take your victim as you find him (smith v leech brain) |
|
|
final part |
therefore, it is likely that (d) did/did not cause the damage complained |
