"The way ½Û×ÓÊÓƵ dealt with us was receptive and not pushy. They took the time to get to know us and what we needed as a business."
Irwin Mitchell
Access all documents on Causation
Causation comprises the policy definitions on what in law constitutes a factual connection between an act and a consequence that in some way follows from that act.
For policy reasons, the law requires the prosecution prove a sufficient causal connection between the act or omission complained of and the injury suffered. In this way the law limits liability to consequences which are attributable to the wrongful act or breach, although causation is not dependent on remoteness or immediacy in time. The major test is whether 'but for' the defendant's action, would the victim have been injured in the way that they were. The second aspect to this is whether there was a new intervening act (novus actus interveniens) that came between a wrongful act and its consequences, such that the wrongful act did not truly cause the situation. However, even unusual biological weaknesses in a victim (such as an egg shell skull) do not break the chain of causation, and the Law Reform (Year and a Day Rule) Act 1996 abolished the old rule that the victim
Speed up all aspects of your legal work with tools that help you to work faster and smarter. Win cases, close deals and grow your business–all whilst saving time and reducing risk.
For our full legal glossary and more legal research sources, register for a free Lexis+ trial
What to think about before bringing a private competition action—checklist Is there an actionable claim? Note: private competition actions remain largely regulated by national law and procedural and substantive rules across the EU may vary significantly, therefore assessments in individual jurisdictions will need to be made when planning competition litigation. Possible causes of action • Consider if there is an infringement of UK competition law (or EU competition law prior to the end of the Brexit transition period). ◦ Consider whether the loss suffered can be attributed to an agreement or concerted action between undertakings, especially competing undertakings (see further, The prohibition on restrictive agreements). ◦ Consider whether the loss might have been caused by an entity that is arguably dominant typically with a large share of a relevant market, and could be said to have abused its dominance contrary to Chapter II of the Competition Act 1998 (and/or Article 102 TFEU if prior to the end of the Brexit transition period) (see further, The prohibition on abuse of dominance)....
Coronavirus (COVID-19) and contractual obligations—checklist This Checklist sets out some of the key issues to consider when a party is unable to comply with its contractual obligations due to the impact of coronavirus (COVID-19)—eg to proceed with/complete works under a construction contract, or supply goods or services under a supply contract (or series of supply contracts). Commercial considerations, shared objectives and collaboration will also play a key role in ensuring that parties are able to mitigate the impact of coronavirus on their staff and business, in challenging times and where neither party is at fault. Force majeure Force majeure is a term used to describe an event that is beyond the control of the parties, and which prevents them from fulfilling their contractual obligations: Triggering force majeure • check to see whether your contract contains force majeure provisions or provisions with a similar effect. Note that: ◦ the term ‘force majeure’ may not necessarily be used in the contract, eg the FIDIC 2017 standard form construction contracts use the term...
Discover our 3 Checklists on Causation
Criminal offences are generally divided into two categories: •conduct crimes, and •result crimesA conduct crime is a crime where only the forbidden conduct needs to be proved. For example, an accused is guilty of dangerous driving if they drove a motor vehicle dangerously on a road or other public place. There is no requirement to prove harmful consequences such as injury to another.A result crime is a crime which causes or results in specified consequences. For example, murder requires proof that someone is killed. For any result crime the prosecution must establish:•a factual link between the conduct of the accused and the result they are alleged to have caused (factual causation), and•a sufficient cause in law between the conduct of the accused and the prohibited consequences (legal causation)Factual causation is also known as ‘but for’ causation because it must be established that the result would not have occurred but for the actions of the accused. If factual causation cannot be established the prosecution will fail. For example, in R v...
Remedies for connected lender liability in consumer credit This Practice Note examines a purchaser’s causes of action and remedies where the credit in a supplier-purchaser agreement is financed by a third party. The Consumer Credit Act 1974 (CCA 1974) provides that in certain instances where there is a connection between the supplier of goods and services and the creditor, the borrower will be able to seek a remedy against the creditor under CCA 1974, s 75 where the supplier has made a misrepresentation or is in breach of contract. This Practice Note looks at the main requirements of section 75 and the circumstances in which it might be applied when purchasing goods or services with a credit card. Overview Under a contract for the sale or supply of goods or services as between a supplier and purchaser, the purchaser’s causes of action and remedies are well known. However, what is the position where the transaction is financed by a third-party creditor? In certain debtor-creditor-supplier (or DCS) relationships, a consumer...
Discover our 116 Practice Notes on Causation
Letter of instruction to single joint expert—employment tribunal proceedings Private & confidential [Insert name and address of expert] [Insert date] Dear [insert name of expert] [Insert case heading, eg Ms R Jones v Supermarkets Plc, ET Case Number: 12345] Instruction to act as single joint expert Thank you for agreeing to act as the expert witness in this matter. As you know you will be acting as a single joint expert. We act for [insert name of client] who is [bringing OR defending OR an employment tribunal claim against [insert name of opposing party/parties]. This letter has been countersigned by the solicitors acting on behalf of [insert name of opposing party/parties] to confirm their agreement to the terms of this letter. The aim of this letter is to provide you with the relevant factual background, key documents and to identify the issues you will need to consider. As an expert witness you will be aware of the need for you to comply with certain duties and ensure...
Letter of claim for negligently performed surgery Dear [insert organisation name] Letter of Claim [insert claimant’s name] v [insert defendant’s name] We have been instructed to act on behalf of [insert claimant’s name] in relation to treatment carried out/care provided at [insert name of defendant hospital] by [insert name(s) of surgeon(s) if known] on or around [insert date(s)]. Please let us know if you do not believe that you are the appropriate defendant or if you are aware of any other potential defendants. This letter is sent pursuant to the Pre-Action Protocol for the Resolution of Clinical Disputes. You should acknowledge receipt of this letter in writing and identify who will be dealing with this matter within 14 days. Failure to acknowledge receipt may result in the Claimant issuing proceedings without further reference to you. Further within four months of receipt of this letter you should provide a Letter of Response setting out whether the claim is admitted or denied and provide copies of any...
Dive into our 38 Precedents related to Causation
Should internal staffing costs be deemed indirect or direct losses? 'Direct loss' and 'indirect loss' 'Indirect loss' is most frequently considered in the context of assessing quantum of damages and in interpreting exemption clauses. The normal function of damages for breach of contract is compensatory but is limited by the principles of causation and remoteness. Damage which is too remote is not recoverable even if there is a causal link between the breach of contract and the loss. Hadley v Baxendale established the 'two limb test' for assessing whether damage resulting from a breach of contract is or is not too remote. Damages may only be recovered for: • losses arising naturally—the defaulting party is liable for any losses, which may fairly and reasonably can be considered as arising naturally from the breach of contract. The court will take into consideration the type of trade or transaction in question (direct loss), or • potentially foreseeable losses—those which were in the reasonable contemplation of the parties at...
If 20 or more employees may be made redundant in the next three months, but the employer enters settlement agreements with ten of them right at the outset, does the employer still need to send an HR1 form to BEIS? Form HR1 is the form used where an employer is obliged to notify the government of potential redundancies. The statutory information and consultation obligations, including the obligation on the employer to use the form HR1 to inform the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy (BEIS) of potential redundancies, arises where the employer is ‘proposing to dismiss as redundant’: • 20 or more employees • at one establishment • within any period of 90 days or less For further information, see Practice Note: Collective redundancy—the triggers for the statutory consultation obligations. In this context, ‘dismiss as redundant’ refers to a dismissal for any reason or reasons not related to the individual concerned. For further information, see Practice Note: Collective redundancy—the triggers for the statutory consultation obligations—Proposing to...
See the 83 Q&As about Causation
This week's edition of PI & Clinical Negligence weekly highlights includes news of interest rate reductions for Court Funds Office accounts effective 30 May 2025 following a decrease in the Bank of England’s base rate, and a new guide for the Court of Appeal (Civil Division) introducing mandatory electronic filing and streamlined procedures for civil appeals. We consider a High Court decision where a teenage passenger’s claim for brain damage from a motorbike accident was reduced by 20% for contributory negligence for not wearing a helmet and accepting a ride from an inexperienced rider. We also bring you a workplace COVID-19 appeal that was allowed due to errors in applying the causation test during summary judgment, and a claim involving occupational injury from acoustic shock that was dismissed after the required diagnostic criteria were not met. In addition, we have our usual round-up of other news, cases and New Law Journal articles of interest and we have included a free webinar.
This week's edition of Public Law weekly highlights includes: analysis on the logistics of lifting the automatic suspension in public procurement challenges, new procurement guidance from the Department for Education and Welsh Government, plus the latest results from the Public Procurement Review Service. Also in this edition, UK in a Changing Europe examines the challenges EU nationals continue to face navigating the EU Settlement Scheme in the UK and the Institute for Government publishes an explainer on the outcome of the first UK-EU Summit in London. Case updates this week include a number of freedom of information decisions, a judicial review decision against the Legal Ombudsman, and analysis of the Court of Appeal’s decision in Castellucci on statutory interpretation of the Gender Recognition Act 2004. This edition features further updates on Brexit highlights, Brexit SIs, post-Brexit guidance, equality and human rights, judicial review, freedom of information, public procurement, Subsidy control and State aid, public sector pensions, state accountability and liability, plus details of free webinars on judicial review.
Read the latest 164 News articles on Causation
**Trials are provided to all ½Û×ÓÊÓƵ content, excluding Practice Compliance, Practice Management and Risk and Compliance, subscription packages are tailored to your specific needs. To discuss trialling these ½Û×ÓÊÓƵ services please email customer service via our online form. Free trials are only available to individuals based in the UK, Ireland and selected UK overseas territories and Caribbean countries. We may terminate this trial at any time or decide not to give a trial, for any reason. Trial includes one question to LexisAsk during the length of the trial.
0330 161 1234