Bonnington Castings Ltd v Wardlaw [1956] UKHL 1 – Law Journals

Causation: Looking for answers

Paul Sankey examines the issues in Dr Sido John v Central Manchester and Manchester Children’s University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust ‘The “material contribution” test only applies in cases where it is impossible to attribute particular damage to a specific cause and therefore apportionment cannot be appropriate.’The recent case of Dr Sido John v Central Manchester …

Continue reading "Causation: Looking for answers"

This post is only available to members.

Causation: The sum of the parts

Matthew White weighs up the ‘but for’ test and material contribution in cumulative cause cases ‘The “material contribution” approach applies just as much to multiple factor cases as to single agency cases.’ An article in this publication in 2013 (‘Breach of duty and causation, where are we now?’ by Christopher Sharp QC and Matthew White, …

Continue reading "Causation: The sum of the parts"

This post is only available to members.

Case Report: Carder v The University of Exeter [2016] EWCA Civ 790

Asbestosis; asbestos exposure; liability; actionable damage ‘The Master of the Rolls pointed out that there was an inherent contradiction in the University’s case between accepting it had made a 2.3% contribution to a cumulative disease which causes an individual to be worse off and then seeking to argue that this contribution had made no difference.’ …

Continue reading "Case Report: Carder v The University of Exeter [2016] EWCA Civ 790"

This post is only available to members.

Clinical Negligence: Delay of reckoning

The material contribution test for causation in clinical negligence has been maintained and clarified following Williams and John. Suzanne Farg reports ‘The defendant appealed to the Privy Council on the basis that the Court of Appeal had been “led into error by a misinterpretation of ‘material contribution’ as sufficient for the purposes of causation.”’The recent …

Continue reading "Clinical Negligence: Delay of reckoning"

This post is only available to members.

Negligence: Material contribution to damage

One of the more intellectually challenging concepts in the field of clinical negligence is that of material contribution. Julian Matthews highlights two recent cases which illustrate some of the issues which arise ‘A defendant cannot be held to be liable for loss or damage that it did not cause or to which it made no …

Continue reading "Negligence: Material contribution to damage"

This post is only available to members.

Fairchild Rules: Fair enough?

Patrick Limb QC examines the decision in the appeal case of IEG v Zurich ‘The relaxation of the causal requirement in mesothelioma claims emerged from the conjoined appeals in Fairchild precisely because the insurers were hoping that such claims would founder on the rock of uncertainty created by the inability to satisfy the “but for” …

Continue reading "Fairchild Rules: Fair enough?"

This post is only available to members.

Case Report: Sienkiewicz v Greif (UK) Ltd [2011] UKSC 10

Asbestos; causation; applying Fairchild; single exposure; s3 Compensation Act 2006 ‘The rule in Fairchild applies to single exposure cases of mesothelioma just as it does in multi-exposure cases. In this way, the decision has dealt a very significant blow to the position of defendants in mesothelioma cases.’In Fairchild v Glenhaven Funeral Services Ltd [2002] the …

Continue reading "Case Report: Sienkiewicz v Greif (UK) Ltd [2011] UKSC 10"

This post is only available to members.