LAW1113 Lecture Notes - Lecture 11: Hospital Management Committee, Area Health Authority, Susan Kiefel
Document Summary
D(cid:495)s breach must have caused the ps harm (a) that the negligence ws a necessary condition of the occurrence of the. The defendant(cid:495)s negligent act does not have to be the only cause of the plaintiff(cid:495)s injury. Factual causation prove that she would not have engaged in the activity if she had been given the. Barnett v chelsea & kensington hospital management committee. If the alleged breach is a failure to warn, then the issue of what the p would have done is crucial. )n such cases, the (cid:494)but for(cid:495) test will only be made out if p can warning. Wallace v kam: wallace saw dr kam in an attempt to fix his injured back. D failed to warn p of two potential consequences, one minimal, one catastrophic. P(cid:396)o(cid:271)le(cid:373)s with a(cid:374)d li(cid:373)its of the (cid:862)(cid:374)e(cid:272)essa(cid:396)y (cid:272)o(cid:374)ditio(cid:374)(cid:863) (cid:396)e(cid:395)ui(cid:396)e(cid:373)e(cid:374)t. The but-for test plays an important role in establishing tortious liability; however, sometimes it can be problematic.
