Tags » Causation

Causation: Heneghan v Manchester Dry Docks Ltd [2016] EWCA Civ 86

Heneghan (a lung cancer case and not a mesothelioma case) suggests that one can approach the question of causation in disease cases by asking
(a) What probably caused the injury? 80 more words

Employers' Liability

Three approaches to causation: 'but for', 'material contribution to injury' and 'material contribution to the risk of injury'.

There are three possible approaches to the question of causation which we can see at work in disease litigation.
The ‘but for’ test is the normal tortious approach. 303 more words

Employers' Liability

‘But for’ Causation: the standard approach

Following on from the introduction

‘But for’ causation answers the question whether a particular substance probably caused the injury.
The standard way of proving causation is to show that, ‘but for’ the defendant’s negligence the claimant would not have suffered the injury. 106 more words

Employers' Liability

Material Contribution to the injury: Bonnington Castings Ltd v Wardlaw [1956] AC 613

Following on from the introduction [here].

Here we are concerned with material contribution to the injury (i.e. whether a substance which could cause injury did cause injury) 367 more words

Employers' Liability

Failure of Medical Science: Material contribution to the risk of injury

Following on from the introduction [here]

Bonnington Castle cannot be used to fill the gaps in the medical evidence and so where proof is lacking for want of scientific developments, another approach is required.  268 more words

Employers' Liability

Apportionment of liability for psychiatric injury in employment cases: BAE Systems (Operations) Limited v Konczak [2017] EWCA Civ 1188

This case arose in the context of an employment case where injury followed-on rather than in an employers’ liability case.

Discussing Rahman [here] , Underhill L.J said, 734 more words

Employers' Liability

Liability for psychiatric harm in employers liability cases: Hatton v Sutherland [2002] EWCA Civ 76

Hales L.J. (as she then was) said,
43. …the following practical propositions emerge.
(1) There are no special control mechanisms applying to claims for psychiatric (or physical) illness or injury arising from the stress of doing the work the employee is required to do (para 22). 754 more words

Employers' Liability