Disputes 2: Breaking The Chain Of Causation

Front 1

Novus Actus Interveniens

Back 1

1. 3rd party act

2. Act of claimant

3. Act of nature

Front 2

McKew v Holland and Hannen

Act of C - NAI

Back 2

- C suffered a leg injury and later tried to descend a steep flight of stairs without assistance and fell

- D was not liable for second injuries as his actions were unreasonable

Front 3

Wieland v Cyril Lord Carpets

Act of C - NAI

Back 3

- C descended stairs shortly after collar fitted, injury sustained on last step

- D liable for further injury as C had not acted unreasonably

Front 4

Corr v IBC Vehicles

Act of C

Back 4

- C suffered physical injury and depression, then committed suicide

- D still liable for C's death as it was a direct result of the psychiatric injuries

Front 5

Carslogie Steamship v Royal Norwegian Government

Act of Nature

Back 5

- C's ship was damaged by D, C's owners put the ship to sea and it was damaged during a heavy storm

- The storm was foreseeable and acted as a novus actus

Front 6

Knightley v Johns

3rd Party

Back 6

- D4 sent C into a tunnel where an accident had happened, C crashed into D2 on a blind bend

- D1 was not liable, D4 was as his decision to send C in instead of around was a novus actus interveniens

Front 7

Rouse v Squires

3rd Party

Back 7

- D1 crashed his lorry and C was at the scene, another lorry didn't see the crash in time and also crashed causing C injuries

- Was reasonably foreseeable that another river may not be able to stop in time so D1 was still liable

Front 8

Robinson v Post Office

3rd Party

Back 8

Medical treatment which is performed in a non-negligent manner is unlikely to break the chin of causation

Front 9

Webb v Barclays Bank

3rd Party

Back 9

Negligent medical treatment may break the chain of causation if it is 'so gross as to break the chain of causation'

Front 10

Lamb v Camden

3rd Party

Back 10

- D fractured a waterpipe outside C's house causing them to vacate, one year later the council still hadn't done the repairs and squatters had moved in and done further damage

- Damage caused by squatters did break the chain as it was not foreseeable

Front 11

Stansbie v Troman

3rd Party

Back 11

- D was alone in C's house decorating, he left to get more wallpaper and failed to lock up, a thief broke in and stole property

- Thief did not break chain, D was under a duty to lock up

Front 12

Intervening Rescue Attempt

3rd Party

Back 12

Does D owe a duty of care to a rescuer?

1. Is it reasonably foreseeable that a rescue will be attempted?

2. Is there a relationship of proximity between D and the rescuer?

3. Is it fair, just and reasonable to impose a duty?

Front 13

Wagner v International Railway

3rd Party

Back 13

- C went to rescue his cousin who had fallen out of a train and ended up falling and sustaining injuries himself

- Rescue is foreseeable, 'danger invites rescue'

Front 14

Tolley v Carr

3rd Party

Back 14

- C tried to move a crashed vehicle out of the way of oncoming traffic, 2 vehicles crashed into him causing serious injuries

- The greater the risk to others he is trying to avert, the greater the imperilment to his safety the will accept as reasonable

-Burden of proof on D to show C was foolhardy

Front 15

Baker v T E Hopkins

3 Party

Back 15

- C went down a well to rescue 2 people, all 3 died

- D tried to use volenti non fit injuria as a defence

- Court held D was liable, C's actions were foreseeable in the circumstances