| Hint | Answer | % Correct |
|---|---|---|
| Two types of causation | Factual | 100%
|
| Two types of causation | Legal | 88%
|
| Usual test | But for test | 44%
|
| Case for this? | Barnett v Chelsea [1969] | 31%
|
| Two tests for legal causation? | Remoteness of damage | 31%
|
| Two types of material contribution? | To the harm | 25%
|
| What is the name of the rule where one may suffer more harm than expected due to frailty? | Egg shell skull rule | 19%
|
| Will D be responsible for full extent of the harm? | Yes | 19%
|
| Two types of injury | Divisible (cumulative) | 13%
|
| Two types of injury | Indivisible (non-cumulative) | 13%
|
| Two types of material contribution? | To the risk of harm | 13%
|
| What case gave rise to apportioned damages in mesothelioma situations | Barker v Corus [2006] | 6%
|
| Bonnington Customs v Wardlaw [1956] | 6%
| |
| What case gave rise to the mesotheliomaexception? | Fairchild v Glenhaven Funeral Services [2002] | 6%
|
| Mcghee v National Coal Board [1973] | 6%
| |
| What case addresses issue of negligent and ordinary exposure to asbestos? | Sienkiewicz v Frief Ltd [2011] | 6%
|
| Smith v Leech Brain [1962] | 6%
| |
| Two tests for legal causation? | Any intervening acts | 0%
|
| What is the case for causal link with regards to informed consent? | Chester v Afshar [2005] | 0%
|
| Home Office v Dorset Yacht [1970] | 0%
| |
| What statute nullified/revamped this? | S.3 Compensation Act 2006 | 0%
|
| Wagon Mound (No 1) [1961] | 0%
|