Examination Timing: 00H00M26S
Baby Emily was rushed to St. Mary's Hospital suffering from meningitis. At the hospital, she was negligently prescribed an excessive dose of penicillin. Shortly after, Emily became deaf. It is unclear whether the meningitis or the penicillin overdose was responsible for her deafness.
Which is the appropriate causation test to be used?
< 上一页
Your selected option: B
下一页 >
In cases where there are potentially multiple independent causes of harm, the appropriate test for causation is the "balance of probabilities" test. This means that the claimant must demonstrate that it is more likely than not (greater than 50% chance) that the defendant's negligence caused the harm. The "but-for" test (Option A) is more suitable when there is a single independent cause. The material contribution test (Option B) applies when there are multiple cumulative causes contributing to the harm. In this scenario, since either the meningitis or the penicillin could have independently caused the deafness, the balance of probabilities is the correct test. The consequential losses test (Option D) and acts of a third party (Option E) are not applicable in determining factual causation in this context.
Key Point: The balance of probabilities test is used to establish causation when there are potentially multiple independent causes of harm, requiring proof that the defendant's actions more likely than not caused the injury.
收集问题
tort中判断标准不是material contribution吗？
Thank you for your question. Let's clarify this in the context of English tort law.
In cases where there are multiple potential independent causes of harm, the appropriate test for causation is indeed the "balance of probabilities" test. This means that the claimant (in this case, Emily) must show that it is more likely than not (greater than 50% chance) that the defendant's actions (the negligently prescribed excessive dose of penicillin) caused the harm (Emily's deafness).
The "material contribution" test is applicable when multiple factors cumulatively contribute to the harm. For example, if both the meningitis and the penicillin overdose together contributed to Emily's deafness, then you would use the "material contribution" test to determine causation. However, when there are potentially independent causes, you rely on the "balance of probabilities."
In this scenario, you need to determine whether it is more likely than not that the penicillin overdose caused the deafness, as opposed to the meningitis. Therefore, the "balance of probabilities" is the correct standard to apply.
I hope this clarifies things for you! Keep up the good work and continue asking questions—it's a great way to learn.