levo

Tort: Negligence

Legal causation, intervening acts and remoteness of damage

  • 3 things to know
  • Components 2 and 3

Overview

Difference between factual causation and legal causation, remoteness of damage and thin skull rule.

What you need to know

Answer each one before you reveal it.

Your recallNot started
Key term

What is the difference between factual causation and legal causation?

Key term

What breaks the chain of causation between a breach of duty and the claimant's damage?

Key term

What did McKew v Holland and Hannen and Cubitts (Scotland) Ltd [1969] decide?

Questions from this subtopic

Each one with the model answer underneath.

  1. 1

    What is the difference between factual causation and legal causation?

    Model answer

    Factual causation asks whether the breach made any difference to what happened. Legal causation asks whether the law should treat the breach as the operative cause of the damage.

  2. 2

    What breaks the chain of causation between a breach of duty and the claimant's damage?

    Model answer

    An intervening act that is both unforeseeable and unreasonable breaks the chain of causation. The defendant then escapes liability for the damage flowing from that act.

  3. 3

    What did McKew v Holland and Hannen and Cubitts (Scotland) Ltd [1969] decide?

    Model answer

    A claimant with a leg weakened by the defendant's negligence went down a steep staircase with no handrail or help and fell. The House of Lords held that his own unreasonable conduct broke the chain of causation.

  4. 4

    What did Wieland v Cyril Lord Carpets Ltd [1969] decide?

    Model answer

    A claimant fitted with a surgical collar could not use her bifocal glasses properly and fell down some stairs. The court held her conduct reasonable, so the chain of causation was not broken.

  5. 5

    When does the act of a third party break the chain of causation?

    Model answer

    A third party's act breaks the chain where it is unforeseeable and independent of the defendant's breach. A foreseeable reaction to the danger the defendant created does not break the chain.

  6. 6

    What did Knightley v Johns [1982] decide?

    Model answer

    A police inspector ordered an officer to ride the wrong way through a tunnel after a crash, and the officer was injured. The Court of Appeal held that the negligent order broke the chain of causation from the original crash.

Other ways to work this

The same content, four other ways.

What is inside Levo

Six ways to work the same material.

1Closed book
2Open book
3Closed book

The 3-step method, run for you

Answer cold, learn it, then prove it stuck. Levo tracks the jump between your first attempt and your last.

Parliamentary and European Law Making
Delegated Legislation
Statutory Interpretation
Judicial Precedent

Cram a whole paper in one sitting

Sort every topic into what you know and what you do not, then drill only the weak ones.

The court sits in .
StrasbourgLondonParis

Blank Blitz makes facts automatic

Rapid timed gap-fills on the terms and numbers you need to recall without thinking.

AAn interim injunction restrains publication before trial.
BPublication cannot be undone.
CAn injunction may be the only effective remedy.

Build It gets the exam shape right

Assemble a full-mark answer from its marking points, in the order an examiner wants them.

A Public Bill changes the general law.
TrueFalse

Test It catches misconceptions

Spot the fault in a statement. The traps are the mistakes students actually make.

721941163128510

Brain Breaks between sessions

Short focus games to reset attention, so the next set lands better than the last.

Every question in Tort: Negligence, on a schedule.

Attempt a question from memory, write the correct version, then attempt it again. Levo records the jump between your first attempt and your last, and brings each question back on the day you are due to forget it.

Or £46 a year, about £3.83 a month. Cancel anytime.