ABSTRACT
J Understand the possible effects on the liability of the original defendant of a plea of novus actus interveniens, where the chain of causation has been broken
J Understand the test for establishing causation in law, reasonable foreseeability of harm, so that the damage is not too remote a consequence of the defendant’s breach of duty
J Understand the requirements for a plea of res ipsa loquitur, and the effects of a successful plea
caused the damage suffered by the claimant
4.1 Introduction Once the claimant has shown the existence of a duty of care and proved that it has been breached by falling below the appropriate standard of care he must still prove that the defendant’s negligent act or omission actually caused the damage. As with the other two elements of negligence, the burden is on the claimant to prove the causal link on a balance of probabilities. This may actually be quite difficult to do, particularly where the incident leading to the damage has been the result of multiple causes or where the damage suffered is of an unusual type. Causation is also clearly appropriate to other torts, not just negligence. Even in those torts that are strict liability and where the claimant as a result is relieved only of the burden of proving fault causation is still an issue and the claimant must still show a direct link between the defendant’s acts or omissions and the damage suffered.
