header-logo header-logo

The blame game

16 June 2011 / Kenneth Warner
Issue: 7470 / Categories: Features , Health & safety , Personal injury
printer mail-detail

Kenneth Warner examines causation & industrial disease

It is a basic principle of the law of torts that a defendant will be liable only for the harm that the defendant has caused. In cases of doubt it is incumbent on the plaintiff to show, on the civil standard of proof, that the tortious conduct of the defendant caused the injury that is complained of. In effect, evidence that the tort is the most likely cause of the harm will suffice to discharge the burden, but in principle anything short of that should result in a rejection of the plaintiff’s claim. This rule can cause great difficulties for a plaintiff, where there exist multiple possible causes in fact for the ultimate harm suffered. They may be multiple “guilty” causes; as where the claimant has been exposed to toxic agents with a number of different employers, each independently capable of producing the same disease. Again they may be “guilty” but separate causes which are capable of working cumulatively to bring about the plaintiff’s ultimate harm, as

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Freeths—Ruth Clare

Freeths—Ruth Clare

National real estate team bolstered by partner hire in Manchester

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Partner appointed head of family team

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

Firm strengthens agriculture and rural affairs team with partner return

NEWS
Conveyancing lawyers have enjoyed a rapid win after campaigning against UK Finance’s decision to charge for access to the Mortgage Lenders’ Handbook
The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) has launched a recruitment drive for talented early career and more senior barristers and solicitors
Regulators differed in the clarity and consistency of their post-Mazur advice and guidance, according to an interim report by the Legal Services Board (LSB)
The Solicitors Act 1974 may still underpin legal regulation, but its age is increasingly showing. Writing in NLJ this week, Victoria Morrison-Hughes of the Association of Costs Lawyers argues that the Act is ‘out of step with modern consumer law’ and actively deters fairness
A Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) ruling has reopened debate on the availability of ‘user damages’ in competition claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Edward Nyman of Hausfeld explains how the CAT allowed Dr Liza Lovdahl Gormsen’s alternative damages case against Meta to proceed, rejecting arguments that such damages are barred in competition law
back-to-top-scroll