Recognised Harm in Fact (‘Causation’) - Tort Law

This idea within the remit of tort law primarily refers to the concept of causation that relates to the ‘causal relationship between conduct and result’ so as to serve to connect conduct, complete with actus reus, with the resulting harm, in decisions including R v. Malcherek [1981] 1 WLR 690 and R v. Cheshire [1991] 3 All ER 670, in a concerted effort to produce results that are generally considered to be both just and fair in their nature which is reflected in the section in negligence with the stages that are necessary to show such an offence that is further supported by the decision in The Wagon Mound (No 1) [1961] AC 388 (PC).

It is interesting to note, however, that, in some cases, a chain of causation will not be found to be present, but the court still looks to hold the defendant out to be liable for the plaintiff’s injuries. Such a view is perhaps most effectively illustrated by the decision in Sindell v. Abbott Laboratories (1980) 607 P 2d 924 where the plaintiff consumed medication that made them ill because of negligence during its manufacture, but the actual manufacturer could not be ascertained for certain because more than one company made it. Therefore, with this in mind, the defendant was held liable proportionately to their market share so that this meant that the defendant was effectively held liable for the amount of risk it contributed to the occasioning of harm since the party that caused the injury could not be ascertained for certain.

Back to Tort Law

order-now

Visitors have also looked at...

  • 1Law Essay Scams

    Essay writing scams can be hard to spot.
    Click here to find out how to avoid the essay scams

  • 2Essay writing in the press

    Find out what the press say about essay writing in the 21st century.

  • 3 Meet the Law Essays UK Team

    Find out more about the individuals that provide this first class essay writing service.