Legal Causation

Legal Causation

1. Remoteness

   • Re Polemis (old test): D liable for all consequences of his negligence
     • Wagon Mound (No 1) [1961] - property damage case
       • FACT: Welders was repairing boat - sparks landed on oil - explosion
         • HELD: Oil damage was foreseeable but the ignite of fire (kind of harm) was unforeseeable - cannot claim
           • RATIO: Kind of harm must be foreseeable, if it was unforeseeable, no matter how negligent you are, you cannot claim
             • Exception: egg shell rule - D must take V as he finds him
               • Smith v Leece Brain & Co Ltd
                 • FACT: burnt on lip - pre-cancerous skin - died
                   • HELD: foreseeability of the extent of the injury is irrelevant - no matter how great it is, claimant can claim
                 • Lagden v O'Connor
                   • If C ends up suffering much worse financial loss because they are in a poor financial position, then D has to take his V as he fins him and pay the full extent of the loss even though the other person would have suffered lesser loss
       • Hughes v Lord Advocate [1963] - personal injury case
         • FACT: hole on the ground - paraffin lamp - explosion
           • HELD: C suffered burn was reasonably foreseeable - the exact way in which the burn happened was unforeseeable is irrelevant
             • more generous approach
         • Doughty v Turner Manufacturing Co [1964]
           • FACT: asbestos lid - explosion
             • HELD: eruption of boiling liquid is different from splashing of liquid - cannot claim
               • stricter approach
           • Tremain v Pike [1969]
             • FACT: exposure to rat urine - Weil's disease
               • HELD: bitten by rat was foreseeable but Weil's disease was unforeseeable
                 • restrictive approach
             • Page v Smith [ 1996]
               • FACT: road accident - exhausted after 3 hours and died
                 • HELD: it was enough to show that some personal injury was foreseeable, no matter physical or psychiatric injury
                   • generous approach
               • Jolley v Sutton London Borough Council [2000]
                 • FACT: rotten boat - toppled off carjack - paraplegic
                   • HELD: If personal injury was foreseeable, the exact way in which it happened is irrelevant even though it was unforeseeable
                     • generous (follow Page) + return of Hughes v Lord Advocate

2. Break of COC

   • Intervening Act
     • Deliberate act of 3rd party
       • Crime
         • Lamb v Camden London Borough Council [1981]
           • FACT: Houe flooded - squatters moved in -criminal damage
             • HELD: There was break in COC - Oliver LJ: Reasonable foreseeability; Lord Denning: question of policy; Watkins LJ: matter on instinct
     • Negligent Act of 3rd party
       • Road accident
         • Rouse v Squires [1973]
           • FACT: D1 jack-knifed lorry & blocked motorway - car collided - Mr Rouse was helping - D2 drove negligently and killed him
             • HELD: no break in COC - D2 paid 1/4, D1 paid 3/4
         • Knightley v John [1982]
           • FACT: against traffic flow - sued Mr John, police in charge and driver
             • HELD: there was break in COC - the whole sequence was a natural and probable consequence and reaosonablu foreseeable
       • Medical treatment
         • Mahoney v Kruschick
           • D should have known that potentially e is going to cause C seek for medical help hence he has to take the risk that thing might go wrong - no break in COC
           • applied in Webb v Barclays Bank [2001]
             • FACT: injured polio-infected leg - doctor hasn't explore other options but amputated C's leg
               • HELD: no break in COC
                 • Practitioner text in Clerk and Lindsell, there must be GROSS negligence
     • Deliberate act of claimant
       • Suicide
         • Reeves v Metropolitan Commissioner [2000]
           • FACT: prisoner - suicide tendencies
             • HELD: police has duty of care - no break in COC
         • Corr v IBC [2008]
           • FACT: almost decapitated - physical & psychiatric harm - suicide
             • HELD: The depression was a result of the accident - not Corr's voluntary act - no break in COC
     • Negligent act of claimant
       • McKew v Holland & Hannen & Cubitts (Scotland) Ltd [1969]
         • FACT: Leg gave away when descending the stairs - jump to the bottom to land on the feet but greater injury
           • HELD: acted unreasonably by putting himself in a vulnerable position - break in COC